定位误差影响下的配对进近纵向碰撞风险研究

卢飞; 赵二丽; 梁献匀

doi:10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2023.04.003

定位误差影响下的配对进近纵向碰撞风险研究

doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2023.04.003

中国民航大学空中交通管理学院天津 300300

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目 52272356

中央高校基本业务费自然科学重点项目 3122022101

中国民航大学配套经费项目 3122023PT06

详细信息

通讯作者:
卢飞（1984—），硕士，副教授. 研究方向：空中交通运输规划与管理. E-mail: lufei315@126.com

中图分类号: X949;V35
计量
- 文章访问数: 546
- HTML全文浏览量: 292
- PDF下载量: 26
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-05-17
- 网络出版日期: 2023-11-23

A Study on Longitudinal Collision Risk of Airplanes during Paired Approach Under the Influence of Positioning Error

College of Air Traffic Management, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, China

摘要

摘要: 近距平行跑道（closely spaced parallel runways，CSPRs）配对进近纵向碰撞风险研究对评估配对进近程序的安全性至关重要，其中定位误差又直接影响配对进近纵向碰撞风险。针对以往研究中缺乏对定位误差分布的实际数据的拟合，进行基于实际数据拟合的定位误差影响下的配对进近纵向碰撞风险研究。根据配对进近的实施流程，建立配对前后机纵向间隔随时间变化的运动学模型。对于飞行过程中定位误差，采用实际航空器定位误差统计数据拟合定位误差分布。基于广播式自动相关监视（ADS-B）数据，对航空器最后进近阶段的纵向定位误差进行拟合分析，匹配出适配程度最佳的分布——正态分布。分别研究配对2架飞机机身之间的碰撞风险和前机尾流与后机机身之间的碰撞风险，确定每类碰撞风险模型中积分区间上下限。在正态分布的基础上结合配对进近2架飞机的运动过程，建立配对进近纵向碰撞风险评估模型。收集2020年12月上海虹桥机场B737-800机型相关参数数据并进行算例分析，对给定初始纵向间隔分别为926 m和2 778 m时，机身碰撞风险（P_x1）和尾流碰撞风险（P_x2）随时间的变化进行计算仿真，同时进一步仿真分析不同起始纵向间隔与P_x1，P_x2以及总体纵向碰撞风险最值之间的关系。结果表明：①初始纵向间隔为926 m时，随着时间的增长，P_x1逐渐减小，P_x2逐渐增大，且P_x1远大于P_x2；②初始纵向间隔为2 778 m时，结果相反；③ P_x1随初始纵向间隔的增加逐渐减小；④ P_x2随初始纵向间隔的增加逐渐增大；⑤前后机的总体纵向碰撞风险随初始纵向间隔的增加有先减小后增大的规律，当初始纵向间隔小于2 136 m时纵向碰撞风险主要取决于前后2架飞机机身在纵向上的碰撞风险，反之则取决于前机尾流与后机机身之间的碰撞风险。
- 民航运输安全 /
- 配对进近 /
- 碰撞风险 /
- 定位误差 /
- 数据拟合
Abstract: Studying longitudinal collision risk of paired approach on closely spaced parallel runways (CSPRs) is crucial for assessing its safety, where positioning errors directly influence the longitudinal collision risk during the process. Given the lack of consideration on actual data fitting for positioning error distribution in previous studies, this study aims investigate the longitudinal collision risk during paired approach under the influence of actual data-fitted positioning error. According to the implementation process of paired approach, a kinematic model for the longitudinal spacing between aircrafts before and after pairing is established. In terms of positioning error during flight, statistical data of actual aircraft positioning errors are utilized to fit the distribution. Next, utilizing Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data, the longitudinal positioning error during the final approach phase is analyzed and fitted to identify the best-fitting distribution, that is, normal distribution. The collision risk between the aircraft fuselages in paired approach and the collision risk between the wake turbulence of lead aircraft and the fuselage of trailing aircraft are studied separately, and integral intervals for each collision risk model are determined. Based on the normal distribution and the movements of the paired aircrafts during paired approach, an assessment model for the longitudinal collision risk is established. Finally, data about the B737-800 aircraft at Shanghai Hongqiao Airport in December 2020 are collected for a case study. Simulations are conducted to analyze the changes in collision risk of fuselage P_x1 and collision risk of wake turbulence P_x2 over time under the initial longitudinal separations of 926 m and 2 778 m. Further, the relationship between different initial longitudinal separations and P_x1 / P_x2 or the maximum value of overall longitudinal collision risk. The results indicate that: ①when the initial longitudinal separation is 926 m, P_x1 gradually decreases while P_x2 increases over time, and P_x1 is significantly greater than P_x2. ②When the initial longitudinal separation is 2 778 m, the results are the opposite. ③ P_x1 decreases while P_x2 increases as the initial longitudinal separation increases. ④The overall longitudinal collision risk between the lead and trailing aircrafts decreases first and then increases with increasing initial longitudinal separation; ⑤when the initial longitudinal separation is smaller than 2 136 m, the longitudinal collision risk is primarily determined by the collision risk between the fuselages of lead and trailing aircrafts; when the initial longitudinal separation is larger than 2 136 m, it is determined by the collision risk between the wake turbulence of lead aircraft and the fuselage of trailing aircraft.
- civil aviation transportation safety /
- paired approach /
- collision risk /
- positioning error /
- data fitting

HTML全文

图 1 配对进近过程图

Figure 1. Diagram of paired approach process

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 纵向定位误差分布拟合效果图

Figure 2. Fitting effect diagram of longitudinal positioning error distribution

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 配对飞机纵向间隔与时间的关系图

Figure 3. Relationship diagram between longitudinal interval and time of paired aircraft

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 配对飞机纵向碰撞风险与时间的关系图

Figure 4. Relationship diagram between longitudinal collision risk and time of paired aircraft

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 配对飞机纵向碰撞风险与时间的关系图

Figure 5. Relationship diagram between longitudinal collision risk and time of paired aircraft

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 P_x1，P_x2随初始纵向间隔变化关系图

Figure 6. Relationship diagram of P_x1, P_x2 with variations in initial longitudinal interval

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 纵向碰撞风险随初始纵向间隔变化关系图

Figure 7. Relationship diagram of longitudinal collision risk with variations in initial longitudinal interval

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 不同跑道间隔下的纵向碰撞风险

Figure 8. Longitudinal collision risk at different runway intervals

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 配对进近相关参数符号定义

Table 1. Definition of symbols of paired approach related parameters

参数	符号定义	数值	单位	参数	符号定义	数值	单位
v_li	前机起始配对进近速度	73.89	m/s	h_THR	前机跑道入口高度	15	m
v_ti	后机起始配对进近速度	73.89	m/s	t_lu	前机匀速运动时间	—	—
v_lf	前机最后配对进近速度	68.92	m/s	t_tu	后机匀速运动时间	—	—
v_tf	后机最后配对进近速度	69.46	m/s	S_l	前机全程飞行距离	—	—
a_l	前机加速度	-0.076	m/s²	S₀	配对飞机起始纵向间隔	—	—
a_t	后机加速度	-0.076	m/s²	D	近距平行跑道中心线之间距离	365	m
t_ld	前机匀减速运动时间	—	—	W_t	后机翼展	35.8	m
t_td	后机匀减速运动时间	—	—	W_l	前机翼展	35.8	m
α	前机下滑角	3	（°）	F_l	前机机身长度	39.5	m
β	后机下滑角	3	（°）	F_t	后机机身长度	39.5	m
γ	后机侧向偏置角	3	（°）	v_w	侧风风速	3	m/s
S_t	后机侧向偏置结束至跑道入口距离	1 389	m	θ	侧风风向	90	（°）
t_tous	后机侧向偏置进近匀速运动时间	—	—	v_g	地面效应作用下尾流侧向移动速度	2	m/s
h_SAP	前机稳定进近定位点高度	305	m
注：“—”代表数据不可直接获得。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 纵向碰撞风险模型相关参数取值

Table 2. Values of related parameters of longitudinal collision risk model

参数	数值	参数	数值
μ₁₁	123.8	S_{min 1} /m	-39.5
σ₁₁	112.86	S_{max 1} /m	39.5
μ₁₂	123.8	S_{min 2} /m	4 234.99
σ₁₂	112.86	S_{max 2} /m	12 000

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(23)

[1]	杨骁勇, 张辉, 刘尚豫, 等. 航空安全领域研究进展可视化综述[J]. 交通信息与安全, 2021, 39(3): 8-16. doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2021.03.002 YANG X Y, ZHANG H, LIU S Y, et al. A visualized review of research progress in aviation safety[J]. Journal of Transport Information and Safety, 2021, 39(3): 8-16. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2021.03.002
[2]	HAMMER J. Case study of paired approach procedure to closely spaced parallel runways[J]. Air Traffic Control Quarterly, 2000, 8(3): 223-252. doi: 10.2514/atcq.8.3.223
[3]	LANDRY S, PRICHETT A R. The safe zone for paired closely spaced parallel approaches: implications for procedures and automation[C]. 19^th Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Philadelphia, PA, USA: IEEE, 2000.
[4]	CARPENTER B, KUCHAR J, CARPENTER B, et al. Probability-based collision alerting logic for closely spaced parallel approach[C]. 35^th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Reno, NV, USA: AIAA, 1997.
[5]	BURNHAM D C, HALLOCK J N, GREENE G C. Wake turbulence limits on paired approaches to parallel runways[J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2002, 39(4): 630-637. doi: 10.2514/2.2975
[6]	EFTEKARI R R, HAMMER J B, HAVENS D A, et al. Feasibility analyses for paired approach procedures for closely spaced parallel runways[C]. 2011 Integrated Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance Conference. Herndon, VA, USA: IEEE, 2011.
[7]	TEO R, TOMLIN C J. Computing danger zones for provably safe closely spaced parallel approaches[J]. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2003, 26(3): 434-442. doi: 10.2514/2.5081
[8]	MCKISSICK B. Wake encounter analysis for aclosely spaced parallel runway paired approach simulation[C]. 9^th AIAAAviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (ATIO)and Aircraft Noise and Emissions Reduction Symposium(ANERS). Hilton Head, SC, USA: AIAA, 2009.
[9]	GEYER M, SOARES M, BARNES S, et al. RNAV(GPS)total system error models for use in wake encounter risk analysis of depenent paired approaches to closely-spaced parallelrunways[R]. Cambridge: John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, 2014.
[10]	KENNETH L, STEPH P, PAUL H, et al. Paired approach flight demonstration: Planning and development activities[C]. 2018 Integrated Communications, Navigation & Surveillance Conference. Washington, D. C. USA: AIAA, 2018.
[11]	KENNETH L, MARY E M, CURT K, et al. Paired approach flight demonstration results[C]. 2019 Integrated Communications, Navigation & Surveillance Conference. Washington, D. C. USA: AIAA, 2019.
[12]	胡明华, 田勇, 李凯. 机场近距平行跑道进近方法研究[J]. 交通运输工程与信息学报, 2003, 1(1): 64-69, 117. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JTGC200301009.htm HU M H, TIAN Y, LI K. Study of approach procedure to closely spaced parallel runways[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering and Information, 2003, 1(1): 64-69, 117. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JTGC200301009.htm
[13]	卢飞, 张兆宁, 魏志强, 等. 近距平行跑道配对进近纵向碰撞风险安全评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2013, 23(8): 108-113. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-3033.2013.08.018 LU F, ZHANG Z N, WEI Z Q, et al. Longitud inal collision risk safety assessment of paired approach to closed spaced parallel runways[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2013, 23 (8): 108-113. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-3033.2013.08.018
[14]	卢飞, 朱楠, 杨斯, 等. 近距平行跑道配对进近侧向碰撞风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2016, 26(11): 87-92. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZAQK201611019.htm LU F, ZHU N, YANG S, et al. Assessment of lateral collision risk in closed spaced parallel runways paired approach[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2016, 26(11): 87-92. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZAQK201611019.htm
[15]	孙佳, 田勇. 近距平行跑道配对进近中的碰撞风险分析[J]. 哈尔滨商业大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 30(2): 241-245. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HLJS201402029.htm SUN J, TIAN Y. Collision risk analysis in close spaced parallel runway paired approaches[J]. Journal of Harbin University of Commerce, 2014, 30(2): 241-245. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HLJS201402029.htm
[16]	牛夏蕾, 吕宗平, 张兆宁. 近距平行跑道配对进近最小跟驰距离的计算[J]. 航空计算技术, 2015, 45(4): 46-48. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HKJJ201504012.htm NIU X L, LYU Z P, ZHNAG Z N. Minimum in-trail distance for paired closely spaced parallel[J]. Aeronautical Computing Technique, 2015, 45(4): 46-48. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HKJJ201504012.htm
[17]	吕宗平, 张兆宁, 牛夏蕾. 基于速度和导航误差的配对进近碰撞风险研究[J]. 航空计算技术, 2015, 45(6): 36-40. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HKJJ201506009.htm LYU Z P, ZHANG Z N, NIU X L. Collision risk safety assessment of paired approach basd on velocity error and positioning error[J]. Aeronautical Computing Technique, 2015, 45(6): 36-40. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HKJJ201506009.htm
[18]	卢飞, 滕景杰, 吴俊, 等. 尾流影响下的CSPRs配对进近侧向碰撞风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(2): 99-105. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZAQK202002017.htm LU F, TENG J J, WU J, et al. Lateral collision risk of CSPRs paired approach under wake impact[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(2): 99-105. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZAQK202002017.htm
[19]	卢飞, 滕景杰, 吴俊, 等. 尾涡流场影响下的CSPRs配对进近侧向碰撞动力学分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30 (4): 21-27. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZAQK202004004.htm LU F, TENG J J, WU J, et al. Lateral collision dynamics of CSPRs paired approach under influence of wake vortex field[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(4): 21-27. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZAQK202004004.htm
[20]	田勇, 颜于杰, 万莉莉, 等. 近距平行跑道配对进近运行间隔研究[J]. 航空计算技术, 2015, 45(5): 11-14. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HKJJ201505004.htm TIAN Y, YAN Y J, WAN L L, et al. Research on separation of aircrafts for paired approaches to closely spaced parallel runways[J]. A eronautical Computing Technique, 2015, 45 (5): 11-14. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HKJJ201505004.htm
[21]	中国民用航空局. 中国民用航空局令第190号: CCAR-93TM-R4[S]. 北京: 中国民用航空总局, 2007. Civil Aviation Administration of China. Decree of Civil Aviation Administration of China No. 190: CCAR-93TM-R4[S]. Beijing: Civil Aviation Administration of China, 2007. (in Chinese)
[22]	ROSSOW V J, MEYN L A. Relationship between vortex meander and ambient turbulence: AIAA-2006-7811[R]. Reston: AIAA, 2006.
[23]	KENNETH L, MARY E M, CURT K, et al. Paired approach flight demonstration results[C]. 2019 Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference, New York: AIAA, 2019.