0.04 с
Work packages WP1 WP2 WP3 WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7

Work packages

WP 1. System archi­tec­tu­res & requi­re­ments

Leader: ONERA
Task 1.1 A/C system defi­niti­on & requi­re­ments
/ CESA

A state of art and a desc­ript­ion of the diff­erent flight control system archi­tec­tu­res (for subs­equent anal­ysis) will be done. The requi­re­ments will be defined acco­rding to airc­raft type sele­cted.

The airc­raft type and size will be sele­cted based on current infor­ma­tion avai­labl­e. A few archi­tec­tu­res will be expl­ored, studied and disc­ussed in order select the most appr­opri­ate among the next: large comm­ercial airc­raft (A330/A340 class), regi­onal airc­raft (ATR archi­tec­tu­res), Tran­sport airc­raft (10-Ton class) and 100-seater Sukhoi Supe­rjet 100.

Task 1.2 Anal­ysis of diff­erent archi­tec­tu­res
/ UAC

This task will include the foll­owing actions:

  • Cons­ider­atio­n of various flight control actu­atio­n system (FCAS) archi­tec­tu­res which comply with the system requi­re­ments defined in WP1.1. These cons­ider­atio­ns will be mainly done in terms of system power source and its onboard layout. So archi­tec­tu­res can be sepa­rated at high level into the foll­owing types, where FCAS is powered by:

    • Airb­orne hydr­aulic systems.
    • Local hydr­aulic systems.
    • Airb­orne elec­trical system.
    • Comb­ined power sources.
  • Anal­ysis of the cons­ider­ed archi­tec­tu­res in terms of energy effi­cien­cy, weight and dime­nsio­ns with respect to current and adva­nced tech­nolo­gical levels Cons­ider­atio­n of future trends for poss­ible FCAS for MEA or AEA char­acte­rist­ics impr­ovem­ent.
Task 1.3 Health Moni­to­ring & safety asse­ssme­nt
/ CESA

Axis 1: HUMS — Health Moni­to­ring of the FCASA HUMS solu­tion for the system will be deve­loped in this project in order to fulfil the Safety requi­re­ments, to improve the Reli­abil­ity and to reduce the main­tena­nce costs asso­ciat­ed to unsc­hedu­led remo­vals.

The HUMS comp­rise­s 3 diff­erent levels:

  • Usage Moni­to­ring, esta­blis­hing parts to be moni­tore­d.
  • Dete­ctio­n of faults and fail­ures, diag­nosi­s incl­uding iden­tifi­cati­on and isol­atio­n of fail­ures.
  • Prog­nosi­s, to predict the useful life of the items before failure, based on usage Moni­to­ring.

The results of the HUMS will be impl­emen­ted in the design of the comp­onen­ts of the Systems, in order to obtain a more Reli­able system, and to reduce the main­tena­nce costs, impr­oving the disp­atch­abil­ity of the airc­raft.

Axis 2: Safety asse­ssme­nt — Safety asse­ssment of the cons­ider­ed FCAS Within the system safety asse­ssment axis will be real­ized the foll­owing acti­viti­es:

  • Iden­tifi­cati­on of the most severe failure cond­itio­ns for exis­ting flight control systems and deri­vati­on of the qual­itat­ive and quan­tita­tive safety requi­re­ments.
  • Asse­ssment of the comp­lian­ce of the archi­tec­ture with the appl­icab­le qual­itat­ive safety requi­re­ments (“no single failure leading to cata­stro­phic events”) and iden­tifi­cati­on of related segr­egat­ion requi­re­ments.
  • Asse­ssment of the comp­lian­ce of the archi­tec­ture with the appl­icab­le quan­tita­tive safety requ­irem­ent (acce­ptab­le prob­abil­ity of failure occu­rren­ce per flight/hour) and iden­tifi­cati­on of avai­lable safety margins.

These acti­viti­es will be cond­ucted foll­owing the reco­mmen­ded prac­tice­s of ARP4­754A and the asse­ssment will be done using clas­sical means (e.g. Fault Tree Anal­ysis or Failure Mode and Effect Anal­ysis) and simu­lati­on models of the failure prop­agat­ion in the flight control system (new anal­ysis mean prop­osed in ARP4761).

Task 1.4 System ECU (SECU) requ­irem­ent & spec­ific­atio­n
/ CESA

The System ECU requi­re­ments will be defined in order to comply with:

  • Airc­raft power supply for the ECU and allo­wable power cons­umpt­ion.
  • Space enve­lope and weight.
  • Func­tional blocks.
  • EMI/EMC and ligh­tning prot­ecti­ons.
  • Anal­ogical and digital data to be managed.
  • Health Moni­to­ring inte­grat­ion.
  • Comm­unic­atio­n between actu­ators, to control the exte­nsio­n and retr­acti­on of the diff­erent actu­ators and avoid the force figh­ting.
  • Reli­abil­ity and safety requi­re­ments to comply with the MTBF.
  • Envi­ronm­ental Requ­irem­ents and test to be done.
  • Redu­ndant SECU in order to avoid a single failure affe­cting Flight Safety/Reli­abil­ity requi­re­ments.
Task 1.5 actu­ators & system test rig requi­re­ments & spec­ific­atio­ns
/ ONERA

Axis 1: Defi­niti­on of the requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns for EMA This subtask will mainly be done by CESA with the part­icip­atio­n of TsAGI, ONERA and MAI. Defi­niti­on will be done through actu­ators work regimes anal­ysis based on the conc­lusi­on of WP1.1 and WP1.2. During this task requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­n to EMA will be defined in terms of:

  • Dynamic char­acte­rist­ics – freq­uenc­y resp­onse­s, velo­city char­acte­rist­ics and dynamic stif­fnes­s.
  • Stall load (maximum force which actu­ator can fight at zero velo­city) and range of work­load­s in which EMA can operate without crit­ical drop of its velo­city.
  • Char­acte­rist­ics at low input control signals to provide the acce­ptab­le level of closed control loop “A/C-FCAS” self-osci­llat­ion.
  • Safety char­acte­rist­ics – comp­lete failure and cont­roll­ed fault prob­abil­ity, and unco­ntro­lled fault with/without disp­lace­ment prob­abil­ity.
  • Backup poss­ibil­ity (damping mode pres­ence).
  • Poss­ible design, kine­matic scheme and reducer type.
  • Overall power of elec­tric motor and redu­ctio­n rate requ­ired.

Axis 2: Defi­niti­on of the requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns for EHA This subtask will mainly be done by TsAGI with the cons­ulta­tive help of ONERA thanks to their expe­rien­ce and UAC as a cons­umer. The requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns for EHA will be defined in the same as for EMA (see above).

Axis 3: Defi­niti­on of the requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns for the System Test Rig — Defi­niti­on of the requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns for the System Test Rig Within this subtask the requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns will be defined to which the system test rig has to comply in terms of:

  • Geom­etry, Mech­anical Stress, Elec­trical Power supply in order to be able to conduct the tests in WP5.2 depe­nding on choices in WP1.1 and 1.2.
  • Sensors for EMC and thermal measu­re­ments in order to be able to conduct the tests in WP5.2 and to deliver the data inputs for WP2.3 and WP2.4 depe­nding on choices in WP1.1 and 1.2.
  • Thermal boun­dary cond­itio­ns (loca­tion of actu­ators and ECUs, mana­gement of envi­ronm­ental cond­itio­ns, temp­erat­ure, heat reje­ctio­n, cooling mana­geme­nt, etc.) in order to be able to follow the test proc­edur­es defined in WP5.1 during the tests in WP5.2 and the tests fore­seen in WP2.3.
  • The stab­ilit­y of the elec­trical network by means of Line Impe­dance Stab­iliz­atio­n Netw­orks (LISN) at power supply level.

WP 2. Math­emat­ical mode­ling, simu­lati­on & asse­ssme­nt

Leader: TsAGI
Task 2.1 actu­ators/ECU & SECU math­emat­ical & nume­rical mode­ling
/ TsAGI

Math­emat­ical models of EMA/EHA and SECU will be deve­loped within this task. This will be done by three iter­atio­n steps.

Exis­ting expe­rien­ce of EMA/EHA and SECU common oper­ating prin­cipl­es will be used on the first step for initial math­emat­ical model crea­tion. These math­emat­ical models will be used for actu­ators static and dynamic char­acte­rist­ics rese­arch before actu­ator deve­lopm­ent. Math­emat­ical models deve­loped on this step should be simple enough to use it for A/C simu­lati­on in real-time but reflect actu­ator main prop­erti­es in the same time. This will provide actu­ators requi­re­ments clar­ific­atio­n and the ability to go to first step of the math­emat­ical simu­lati­on of A/C motion.

Desired actu­ators deve­lopm­ent deci­sion­s made during WP3 tasks will be the base for corr­ecti­ng initial math­emat­ical models of EMA and EHA to make them more precise. And again the clar­ific­atio­n loop closes.

The expe­rime­ntal data, obta­ined in WP5, will be util­ized to maxi­mize dete­rmin­atio­n of the math­emat­ical models during the third step of iter­atio­n. All models deve­loped will include sub-models for the foll­owing actu­ator elem­ents:

  • Mech­atro­nic module.
  • Reducer (redu­ctio­n ratio, blind zone, stif­fnes­s, inertia).
  • Poss­ible fail­ures.

Anal­ysis of math­emat­ical models will include closed and open control loop anal­ysis in both time and freq­uenc­y domains. The anal­ysis will also include failure mode and energy system mode­llin­g.

The task will be done under TsAGI lead­ersh­ip with part­icip­atio­n of MAI, CESA and Tecn­alia.

Task 2.2 Math­emat­ical & HIL simu­lati­on of airc­raft motion
/ TsAGI

Pecu­liar­itie­s of actu­ator dynamic char­acte­rist­ics may give cons­ider­able infl­uence to the foll­owing char­acte­rist­ics of an airc­raft with FCS:

  • “Airc­raft-FCS” closed loop dynamic char­acte­rist­ics: stab­ilit­y margins, tran­sient resp­onse­s etc. (stab­ilit­y char­acte­rist­ics and flying qual­itie­s).
  • “Airc­raft-FCS” stab­ilit­y at high inputs, i.e. stab­ilit­y at pilot command signals and dist­urba­nces (espe­cial­ly wind dist­urba­nces) of large magn­itud­e, taking into account nonl­inea­rity of actu­ator char­acte­rist­ics at large input signals.
  • “Airc­raft-FCS” stab­ilit­y at small inputs, i.e. pres­ence of self-induced osci­llat­ions with small magn­itud­e, due to the nonl­inea­rity of actu­ator char­acte­rist­ics at very small input signals.

That’s why the obje­ctive of this task is to simu­late dyna­mics of A/C with EMA and/or EHA as primary flight control actu­ators. Math­emat­ical simu­lati­on will be perf­ormed for all cand­idate FCAS archi­tec­tu­res deve­loped in WP1. The results obta­ined will be util­ized as an input for WP3 with the purpose of more precise defi­niti­on of demands to elec­tric­ally-powered actu­ators dyna­mical char­acte­rist­ics. HIL simu­lati­on will serve as defi­niti­ve demo­nstr­atio­n that dynamic char­acte­rist­ics of A/C with EMA/EHA deve­loped conf­orms to avai­lable flying qual­itie­s spec­ific­atio­ns espe­cial­ly in terms of stab­ilit­y margins.

Oper­atio­n of FCS flight enve­lope prot­ecti­on algo­rith­ms, part­icul­arly α, n-limi­ters. The mode­lling will be done for the foll­owing control loop in which actu­ator will be pres­ented as a model on the first step and as a prot­otype after its manu­fact­uring on the second step during HIL simu­lati­on.

The task will be done mainly in TsAGI with the help of MAI, who will provide nece­ssar­y infor­ma­tion and modi­fica­tion­s to actu­ator models if needed.

Task 2.3 Mana­gement of thermal envi­ronm­ental aspects
/ ONERA

The obje­ctive is to simu­late the thermal beha­viou­r of all or parts of the system (ECU, EHA or EMA incl­uding wiring) depe­nding of envi­ronm­ental cond­itio­ns as thermal infl­uenc­es (cooling meth­odol­ogy, flight cond­itio­ns, conf­ined spaces, heat limi­tati­ons versus surr­ound­ing mate­rial­s (comp­osit­e) and crit­ical items. Deta­iled simu­lati­ons comp­leted by expe­rime­ntal data will be used to develop simp­lifi­ed models of wing box cavity based on a network appr­oach. A stoc­hast­ic problem is then treated to opti­mize the sens­itiv­ity and the accu­racy of the simp­lifi­ed model by eval­uati­ng lead para­mete­rs and their infl­uenc­es. The new vali­dated simple network model could subs­titu­te succ­essf­ully for high-fide­lity simu­lati­ons in the mana­gement process. As a result heat with­drawal and disp­ersi­on tech­nolo­gies will be prop­osed to be impl­emen­ted during the deve­lopm­ent phase.

Model of wiring losses: Star­ting from data esta­blis­hed in WP 2.4, a model of the wiring thermal losses is deve­loped and used to iden­tify the thermal impact of a harness desc­ribed in sele­cted archi­tec­tu­res and acco­rding to elec­trical loads imposed. The main obje­ctive of this task will be to desc­ribe the thermal beha­viou­r of each elem­enta­ry wire from its cons­titu­ents (number of strands of core, thermo physics prop­erti­es, part of insu­lati­on, conv­ecti­on and radi­atio­n, harness dens­enes­s).

Thermal desc­ript­ion of actu­ator envi­ronm­ent: Defi­niti­on of a generic 3D geom­etry which is repr­esen­tati­ve of the local envi­ronm­ent of the ECU and EMA for the sele­cted conf­igur­atio­n. Defi­niti­on of thermal cons­trai­nts (peak/average heat reje­ctio­n, flight crit­ical cond­itio­ns, air cooling char­acte­riza­tion).

Simu­lati­on of actu­ator thermal envi­ronm­ent for defined cond­itio­ns: A deta­iled 3D CFD simu­lati­on is cond­ucted to provide data to build a surr­ogate model based on network appr­oach.

Deve­lopm­ent of a thermal model for actu­ator envi­ronm­ent: Deve­lopm­ent of a network model of the actu­ator thermal envi­ronm­ent, built from desc­ript­ions, design data and simu­lati­on results. A vali­dati­on of the model will be cond­ucted with expe­rime­ntal data prov­ided by test rig anal­ysis. An anal­ysis will be perf­ormed to eval­uate lead para­mete­rs and their infl­uenc­es.

Task 2.4 Mana­gement of EMC envi­ronm­ental aspects
/ ONERA

The obje­ctive of this sub-task is to simu­late nume­rica­lly the cond­ucted emis­sion of the whole wiring system. The simu­lati­on will be carried out with ONERA’s CRIPTE soft­ware which is one of the refe­rence codes for complex cable harness mode­llin­g. Such a model incl­udes two main sub-models: the model of the wiring and the model of the equi­pment which act as term­inal loads at the end of the wiring. The appr­oach we propose will be to vali­date sepa­rate­ly in two first steps both the wiring archi­tec­ture model alone and the equi­pment model alone. Such vali­dati­on will require some upgr­ades of CRIPTE’s curr­entl­y avai­lable feat­ures. Then, those models of cable archi­tec­ture and of equi­pment will be intr­oduc­ed in a whole model to simu­late the cond­ucted emis­sion of the wiring system.

Model of wiring losses: Star­ting from conc­lusi­ons of prev­ious studies, the impl­emen­tati­on of a model of wiring losses must be taken into account to model corr­ectl­y the cond­ucted resp­onse­s of a harness. The main obje­ctive will be to desc­ribe the real losses of each elem­enta­ry wire from its cons­titu­ents (number of strands of core, elec­trical cond­ucti­vity…) but also if poss­ible the losses due to the infl­uence of all wires inside a harness. The loss model will then be coded in ONERA’s CRIPTE Soft­ware.

Cons­ider­atio­n of full wiring archi­tec­ture (wiring and inst­alla­tion) in ONERA’s Tool (CRIPTE soft­ware): Star­ting from the archi­tec­ture desc­ript­ion stated in WP1.2, the mode­lling of all harn­esse­s will be perf­ormed taking into account inst­alla­tion rules (func­tional links, segr­egat­ion…). The main obje­ctive will be to check the capa­bili­ty of the CRIPTE Soft­ware to model a real complex archi­tec­ture and to propose new upgr­ades if nece­ssar­y.

Basic testing of wiring archi­tec­tu­res: The wiring archi­tec­ture model will be tested without models of real load and real sources models but with ideal loads and ideal sources to eval­uate the rele­vance of the whole model. This subtask will thereby vali­date the new models defined and impl­emen­ted in the prev­ious sub-tasks (1 and 2).

State of the art on avai­lable elec­trical models: The main obje­ctive will be to refe­rence the avai­lable elec­trical models of each equi­pment item of our system (full archi­tec­ture) and to check if its elec­trical models are comp­atib­le with EMC tools, with a special emph­asis on the mode­lling of cond­ucted emis­sion­s. The capa­bili­ty to gene­rate Thev­enin’s model as input data and mainly in the freq­uenc­y domain will be addr­essed in this subtask.

Desc­ript­ion and deve­lopm­ent of Thev­enin models: The main obje­ctive of the task will be to desc­ribe corr­ectl­y the Thev­enin models, i.e. the sources and the impe­dance matrix, of each equi­pment item (Power supply, ECU and SECU). Star­ting from the conc­lusi­on stated in the prev­ious subtask, a time domain appr­oach and/or a freq­uenc­y domain appr­oach will be cons­ider­ed. Note that expe­rime­ntal char­acte­riza­tion­s will be nece­ssar­y if the anal­ytical anal­yses don’t allow the defi­niti­on of Thev­enin’s models.

Testing of real wiring archi­tec­tu­res: The wiring archi­tec­tu­res will be tested with the real load models and real sources models in order to eval­uate the cond­ucted emis­sion resp­onse of the wiring. The whole wiring model will thereby inte­grate all models of cables and equi­pment resp­ecti­vely defined and impl­emen­ted. The nume­rical results will be comp­ared to expe­rime­ntal results perf­ormed at system test ring (W5.2).

Task 2.5 A/C with local hydr­aulic systems with pres­sure adap­tati­on nume­rical mode­ling
/ TsAGI

The task mainly aims at energy effi­cien­cy asse­ssment of the tech­nolo­gy of using SMART hydr­osys­tems.

The task be done by TsAGI with part­icip­atio­n of MAI during the foll­owing 2 steps:

  • Deve­lopm­ent of pres­sure control algo­rith­ms for local hydr­osys­tem which can be used in some vari­ants of FCAS archi­tec­tu­res. Such local hydr­osys­tems can be called as SMART or Group EHA, because they power the group of trad­itio­nal elec­troh­ydra­ulic actu­ators. In comp­aris­on to trad­itio­nal cent­rali­zed hydr­osys­tem local hydr­osys­tem can work with the prin­ciple “power on demand” so incr­easi­ng the overall energy effi­cien­cy.
  • A/C motion simu­lati­on with the use of deve­loped algo­rith­ms of pres­sure control. This subtask will be done for impl­emen­ting of archi­tec­tu­res with local hydr­osys­tem effi­cien­cy esti­mati­on.

WP 3. Comp­onen­ts, systems and rigs design & deve­lopm­ent

Leader: CESA
Task 3.1 EMA for flight control appl­icat­ions deve­lopm­ent
/ CESA

The project will design an inno­vati­ve and smart Electro-Mech­anical Flight Control system primary actu­ator focused towards the study and vali­dati­on of future oil less Power by Wire airc­raft. EMA actu­ator will be based on a modular and effi­cient appr­oach that will inte­grate easily exch­ange­able elec­tric and mecha­nical comp­onen­ts with sensors and control stra­tegi­es that will allow auto­matic and auto­nomo­us safety control. The EMA will be desi­gned incl­uding its dedi­cated Elec­tron­ic Control Unit (ECU), a Built In Test equi­pment to detect pote­ntial fail­ures and a disable device to guar­antee comp­atib­ilit­y with emer­genc­y actu­atio­n. Diff­erent conf­igur­atio­ns will be studied and eval­uated to dete­rmine the optimum actu­ator archi­tec­ture from a tech­nical point of view. Volume, mass, elec­trical cons­umpt­ion, power to mass ratio, reli­abil­ity, dura­bili­ty and safety are conc­epts that will drive the deve­lopm­ent.

The inno­vati­ve concept of EMA actu­atio­n system, fully elec­tric­ally powered, will assure a posi­tive envi­ronm­ental impact by impr­oving airc­raft effi­cien­cy, with an incr­ease in the Quality, and Reli­abil­ity of the primary flight control actu­atio­n systems, main­tain­ing the level of comp­lian­ce of Flight Safety requi­re­ments.

The poss­ible failure modes related to EMAs actu­ator are mostly actu­ator jamming of the actu­ator, actu­ator runaway, disc­onne­ctio­n of the actu­ator, and the loss of control surface effi­cacy.

The cause of these failure modes are mainly due stru­ctural parts, elec­trical parts or the group comp­rised by gear­ings parts (basi­call­y bear­ings/screws drive).

Stru­ctural parts are leading prim­aril­y to the failure mode of disc­onne­ctio­n of the actu­ator from the control surface and jamming effect, in a similar way than a Hydr­auli­c/mecha­nical actu­ator. Ther­efore the way to resolve these failure modes is the used ones in current appl­icat­ions (fail safe design and anal­ysis of prob­abil­ity of failure to fulfil the Airw­orth­ines­s requi­re­ments).

Elec­trical parts are invo­lved in several crit­ical final effects (jamming of actu­ator by comb­inat­ion of fail­ures, loss of surface control, runaway of the actu­ator), alth­ough the solu­tion to resolve them is based in the appl­icat­ion of redu­ndan­cy in the design of the elec­tron­ics/elec­trical parts.

The gearing group has also fail­ures modes leading to the jamming of the actu­ator. However, the use of redu­ndan­cy in this case do not resolve the problem, due to the failure in the gearing comp­onen­ts of one actu­ator can lead to jamming of the actu­ator avoi­ding the move­ment of the control surface. The appr­oach of Fault Tole­rant system archi­tec­ture is more complex, heavy and expe­nsiv­e. The other solu­tion is to design an actu­ator tole­rant to the jamming.

The “Adva­nced Flight Control System” actu­ator will be a direct drive actu­ator with single screw archi­tec­ture with an anti-jamming system able to disc­onne­ct the flight surface from screw. The deve­loped actu­ator, due to its anti-jamming system, is able to follow the move­ment imposed by the flight surface (moved by the other actu­ators), assu­ring the move­ment of the flight surface even in case of jamming of mecha­nical parts (incl­uding screw jamming) of one actu­ator.

Inno­vati­on of the prop­osed solu­tion is the capa­bili­ty to act just in the root cause of jamming by acting dire­ctly in the source of the problem, not prev­ious­ly impl­emen­ted in any airb­orne actu­ator. Typical solu­tion­s used in the past by using clut­ches between Gear Boxes and screws did not solve the root cause of main jamming prob­lems because these kind of solu­tion­s avoid jamming events but only just before screws, like jamming in gear boxes, bear­ings or motors, but not the screw jamming itself. Other solu­tion­s used in the past were based on mecha­nical fuses that could be used in case of jamming alth­ough main disa­dvan­tage is the nece­ssit­y of repl­acem­ent of the fuse. No trai­ning or actu­atio­n tests could be perf­ormed with this kind of systems. However, this EMA has “Direct Drive” archi­tec­ture so the best way to acti­vate the prop­osed anti-jamming system.

This kind of back-up solu­tion to avoid mecha­nical jamming in actu­ators is the safest way to solve the mayor jamming prob­lems of elec­trom­echa­nical actu­ators between exte­rnal nut and screw, even for roller or ball screws.

Its dedi­cated elec­tron­ics (ECU) will be conn­ected to a 28 VDC power supply, and the elec­trom­echa­nical actu­ator to a 270VDC network for normal exte­nsio­n/retr­acti­on. ECU will also include the nece­ssar­y elec­tron­ics to control the fram­eles­s BLDC motor and to manage the auxi­liar­y 28V BLDC motor that cont­rols anti-jamming elec­trom­echa­nical system.

In order to improve the Reli­abil­ity and to reduce the main­tena­nce costs asso­ciat­ed to unsc­hedu­led remo­vals, a HUMS solu­tion for the EMA will be deve­loped in this project.

It will include all the main parts of the EMA: elec­tron­ics, motor, stru­ctural parts, sensors, gearing parts (invo­lved in crit­ical safety issues).

Task 3.2 ECU at actu­ator level deve­lopm­ent
/ TECN­ALIA

ECU will be desi­gned to include a Prog­nost­ic Health and Usage Moni­to­ring System (HUMS) to control and analyse the actu­ator status. Main func­tion­s of this ECU will be based on:

  • Usage Moni­to­ring, esta­blis­hing parts to be moni­tore­d, incl­uding mecha­nical parts.
  • Intr­oduce diff­erent way to measure the status of crit­ical parts that could limit or reduce the total life of system due to huge perf­orma­nce degr­adat­ion along cycle.
  • Meas­urem­ent related to effi­cien­cy of system and how this effi­cien­cy evolves along cycles.
  • Dete­ctio­n of faults and fail­ures, diag­nosi­s incl­uding iden­tifi­cati­on and isol­atio­n of fail­ures.
  • Prog­nosi­s, to predict the useful life of the items before failure, based on usage Moni­to­ring. The project will include the anal­ysis and prop­osal of deve­lopm­ent of algo­rith­ms to anti­cipa­te the failure, avoi­ding the unsc­hedu­led removal of the equi­pment (Main­tain­abil­ity subject) or the crit­ical situ­atio­n from Flight Safety point of view. More­over, it will allow impr­oving the change from sche­duled tasks (with higher costs) to CBM (Cond­itio­ned Based Main­tena­nce), with main­tena­nce tasks based on cond­itio­n.
  • When low effi­cien­cy or degr­adat­ion evol­utio­n is decl­ared, anti-jamming system acti­vati­on will be managed by ECU and the status would be send to SECU.
  • Life esti­mato­rs depe­nding on actu­ator status and signals from sensors.
  • Part­icul­arly, the SECU will include Built in Test Equi­pment (BITE), based on Power-up BIT (PBIT) or Cont­inuo­us BIT (CBIT), in charge of dete­cting any failure in mech­anic­s or elec­tron­ics by anal­yzing diff­erent Moni­to­ring signals (like power/current supp­lied to motor), focu­sing the poss­ible failure that avoids the normal oper­atio­n of actu­ator when requ­ired/comm­ande­d. CBIT will manage the acti­vati­on of the auxi­liar­y anti-jamming elec­trom­echa­nical system in order to assure the actu­atio­n of the anti-jamming system.
  • Control of actu­ator posi­tion in a cascade close loop to improve the actu­ator perf­orma­nces.
  • Anti-jamming system is a REUS­ABLE SYSTEM for emer­genc­y, trai­ning, and main­tena­nce after auto­matic sequ­ence saved in ECU.

Within these tasks, TECN­ALIA will lead the deta­iled design of the EMA elec­tron­ic control unit. In order to develop the elec­trical drive control unit (power inve­rter and control system) and to define the best control stra­tegy, a deta­iled forward facing mode­lling appr­oach of the entire actu­ator will be gene­rate­d. Mult­idom­ain mode­lling tech­niqu­es and auto­matic code gene­rati­on capa­bili­ties will be used in order to acce­lera­te the prot­otyp­ing process of the solu­tion. Also the anal­ysis of the elec­trical beha­viou­r such as harm­onic­s THD, EMIS will be esti­mate­d.

As a final step of the conc­eptual design of the EMA, reli­abil­ity aspects will be studied. Poss­ible oper­ating scen­ario­s will be set and safety coun­term­easu­res will be desi­gned. Mech­anical safety and reli­abil­ity systems will be applied as already pointed out in section 1.2 and also elec­tric meas­ures will be taken into account. An alarm status list will be prop­osed and related to poss­ible system malf­unct­ions. Every alarm scen­ario will be related to a system action perf­ormed by control soft­ware or spec­ific phys­ical comp­onen­ts acti­vati­on.

The power drive will be sele­cted amongst state of the art comp­onen­ts with proven reli­abil­ity in aero appl­icat­ions. The power module will inte­grate the 6 IGBT´s of a two level inve­rter. The driver module will be deve­loped ad hoc, feat­uring adva­nced Moni­to­ring and diag­nost­ics capa­bili­ties.

Addi­tion­ally in these tasks, the firm­ware of the ECU (control loop regu­lati­on, comm­unic­atio­ns and adva­nced diag­nost­ics tools) will be deve­loped using tools for rapid prot­otyp­ing. A fully cascade posi­tion, speed and torque control will be impl­emen­ted in the firm­ware using both: an abso­lute encoder with high reso­luti­on and sens­orle­ss tech­niqu­es for rotor posi­tion esti­mati­on (based on motor current/ voltage measu­re­ments) in order to provide redu­ndan­cy in motor control. Asse­mbly and deta­iled part draw­ings and elec­tric board sche­mati­cs will be elab­orat­ed.

Elec­trom­echa­nical actu­ator deve­lopm­ent shall be comp­osed of the foll­owing acti­viti­es:

  • Design of a BLDC fram­eles­s motor. / Umbra
  • Design of the special anti-jamming system. / CESA
  • Design of a special ball/roller screw. / Umbra
  • Design of the dedi­cated ECU incl­uding the power elec­tron­ics. / Tecn­alia
  • HUMS archi­tec­ture to detect faults/fail­ures and to eval­uate the perf­orma­nce degr­adat­ion along time inside actu­ator. / CESA
  • Deve­lopm­ent of Safety Asse­ssment that assures the comp­lian­ce of Airw­orth­ines­s requi­re­ments for the sele­cted archi­tec­ture of the System. / CESA
  • Comp­onent Inte­grat­ion for an entire actu­ator. / CESA
Task 3.3 System ECU (SECU) deve­lopm­ent
/ UMBRA

The System Elec­tron­ic Control Unit will include system mana­gement elec­tron­ic, and a Built In Test equi­pment to detect SECU fail­ures. Diff­erent conf­igur­atio­ns will be studied and eval­uated to dete­rmine the optimum system archi­tec­ture from a tech­nical point of view. Volume, mass, elec­trical cons­umpt­ion, reli­abil­ity, dura­bili­ty and safety are conc­epts that will drive the deve­lopm­ent. The foll­owing para­grap­hs present a prel­imin­ary archi­tec­ture.

  • Manage the comm­ands sent by Flight Control Comp­uter (FCC) via a redu­ndant Field Data Bus to control the posi­tion of whole aero­dyna­mic surface by means a posi­tion close loop by comm­andi­ng actu­ators.
  • EMA control tech­niqu­es can be posi­tion control based or speed control based or a comb­inat­ion of the two; control tech­niqu­es sele­ctio­n will be made as a trade off among hard­ware comp­utat­ional capa­bili­ty, soft­ware comp­lexi­ty and system perf­orma­nce.
  • SECU will send to FCC flight surface status data and system Moni­to­ring data.
  • Control a unique aero­dyna­mic surface with some actu­ators inst­alle­d. For this purpose FORCE-FIGH­TNINg archi­tec­ture to control the oper­atio­n in close loop of all actu­ators should be impl­emen­ted to opti­mize the actu­atio­n and power cons­umpt­ion. Ideally, both elec­trom­echa­nical actu­ators could be comm­anded at same time and same speeds prog­ress­ing at same velo­city and share same load equally. Alth­ough, in a normal oper­atio­n: Each actu­ator has diff­erent mech­anic­s (fric­tion) or elec­tric­s (Kt, Ke, R) char­acte­rist­ics, diff­erent comm­ands will be sent due to comm­unic­atio­n delays having diff­erent speeds that prod­uces that exte­rnal force is not the same in each actu­ator and it can induce an over­load­ed oper­atio­n of one actu­ator.
  • HUMS to control all actu­ators and command the most effi­cient states to each actu­ator (active, standby or anti-jamming) depe­nding on life esti­mati­on of each actu­ator, or a poss­ible jam in one actu­ator.

Prel­imin­ary system perf­orma­nce eval­uati­on has led to define a SECU that will have a redu­ndant archi­tec­ture where a twin boards set is embe­dded in the same mecha­nical box. Control board archi­tec­ture will be based on a micr­ocon­trol­ler device. Field Prog­ramm­able Gate Array appl­icat­ion will be eval­uated during the system archi­tec­ture deve­lopm­ent. Using the same data bus the ECUs comm­unic­ate to the SECU posi­tion and speed data of the EMA. The capa­bili­ty of SECU to power on/power off the ECU will be inve­stig­ated during the system deve­lopm­ent based on the system safety asse­ssme­nt. SECU Control board will impl­ement Moni­to­ring tasks to detect board failure and a SECU manager task to coor­dina­te the acti­viti­es between the control boards.

Task 3.4 Test rig module design
/ TsAGI

The obje­ctive of this task is the design of the test rig which will be comp­osed by the stru­ctural part, the Control Panel (C/P), and a hydr­aulic jack cont­roll­ed by a servo-valve for the simu­lati­on of the loads. The design process will cons­ider results obta­ined in the prev­ious WPs. In the foll­owing figure poss­ible test bench archi­tec­ture is shown. The stru­ctural part will be desi­gned in order to acco­mmod­ate 2 actu­ators, working toge­ther and oper­ating against the same counter-load. Two EMAs along with its ECU one EHA demo­nstr­ator unit with an EMA will be inst­alled and cons­ider­ing EMA feat­ures (EMA lever arm, equi­valent linear inertia etc). One System Elec­tron­ic Control Unit (SECU) that comm­ands actu­ators will also be inst­alle­d.

The real time cont­roll­er on the C/P will provide to SECU mode of oper­atio­ns of the EMA, incl­uding the capa­bili­ty of failure inje­ctio­n. More­over, it will manage the hydr­aulic system that acts on all EMAs/EHA in the same way in order to gene­rate load prof­iles. Through the C/P, force and velo­city set points will be managed by the user in the form of matr­ices of points acco­rding to the disp­lace­ment dete­cted by a linear optical encoder (inst­alled in the load system). The force output will be proc­essed inte­rnal­ly in the C/P through the reading of a load cell placed in series to the axial force gene­rati­on system. The velo­city output will be sent and proc­essed by the SECU.

The C/P and its dedi­cated soft­ware will manage Ground Test (GT), Power On Built-In Test (PBIT) and Cont­inuo­us Built-In Test (CBIT) of the system. The GT and PBIT func­tion must ensure the proper func­tion­ing of all devices in the bench. Star­ting the system, a no-load move­ment of the actu­ators will be prov­ided in order to exclude any poss­ible fail­ures of the EMA/ECU/SECU/Drive. The CBIT func­tion will include all the cont­rols and actions on fault and its mana­geme­nt. The foll­owing table shows some fail­ures and its mana­gement as an example.


Failure Symptom Action Flow action
Drive phase lost Signal from drive Speed Set-Point halved Drive → C/P → SECU
Exce­ssive Load or Current Over­load actu­ator (through comp­aris­on between the load cell value and max oper­ating value) or over­curr­ent Zero speed Set-Point and brake on C/P → SECU

Finally, the C/P will manage the sele­ctio­n, record, storage, plot and display the time-history of the main para­mete­rs of each EMA inde­pend­entl­y (applied load through load cells, posi­tion of the actu­ators, speed of the motors and phase elec­tric motor curr­ents and voltage).

RS232 serial inte­rface will be cons­ider­ed for input and output signals of the C/P. Acco­rding to other part­ners, other serial inte­rface (ARINC-429 or RS-485) could be cons­ider­ed.

The bench will be conn­ected to the indu­strial three-phase. The C/P will be prov­ided with thermal prot­ecti­on (magneto-thermal diff­eren­tial) and solid prot­ecti­on. Appr­opri­ate trans­for­mers and rect­ifie­rs will be inst­alled for elec­tron­ic devices powe­ring at lower volt­ages.

Also in this case, the final design will be eval­uated with other part­ners at the CDR meeting (month 16).

Also special Test rig for HIL simu­lati­on will be desi­gned in TsAGI in order to give the ability to test the closed control loop “A/C-FCS-actu­ator” for its stab­ilit­y margins. The test rig will inco­rpor­ate the ability to:

  • Control actu­ator with digital or anal­ogue inte­rfac­es.
  • Control hydr­aulic loading machine for flight loads (or other load profile) on actu­ators under test real­izat­ion during HIL-simu­lati­on.
  • Visu­alize A/C motion.
Task 3.5 EHA with comb­ined control deve­lopm­ent
/ MAI

Within this task MAI will develop EHA with comb­ined control of its rod velo­city. This task will be done with the help of TsAGI, who will provide reco­mmen­dati­ons based on the test report on the first version of the EHA prot­otyp­e, which was done in 2010.

The main spec­ific issue of comb­ined control EHA is the use of volume control (pump control) at high input control signals as trad­itio­nal EHA and thro­ttle control (valve control) at low input signals, control algo­rith­m changes control type acco­rding to the input signal level, this change is done smoo­thly. This feature prov­ides the energy effi­cien­cy of trad­itio­nal EHAs, but with better dynamic char­acte­rist­ics at low input signals (blind zone is less) comp­ared to trad­itio­nal electro-hydr­aulic actu­ators. This type of EHA will provide optimal char­acte­rist­ics of A/C stab­ilit­y and cont­roll­abil­ity being inte­grat­ed into its fly-by-wire system.

EHA Deve­lopm­ent will firstly include deve­lopm­ent of its stru­cture that will ensure energy and dynamic requi­re­ments. After that, with the use of EHA spec­ific­atio­ns and requi­re­ments from WP1.5.2, the para­mete­rs of EHA main comp­onen­ts to be deve­loped will be dete­rmin­ed.

WP 4. Comp­onen­ts, systems and rigs manu­fact­uring & veri­fica­tion

Leader: CESA
Task 4.1 EMA manu­fact­uring and vali­dati­on
/ CESA

CESA will be in charge of the elec­trom­echa­nical actu­ator vali­dati­on.

Manu­fact­uring of demo­nstr­ator mecha­nical parts will be shared between CESA and Umbra acco­rding to spec­ific­atio­ns and deve­lopm­ent conc­lusi­ons of the WP3.1 tasks. Ball­scre­ws and motor-drive will be manu­fact­ured by Umbra. Asse­mbly acti­viti­es will be made within the CESA faci­liti­es.

After asse­mbly and in order to check the correct oper­ating cond­itio­ns a vali­dati­on of the EMA will be acco­mpli­sh, acco­rding to plan and proc­edur­es issued in the prev­ious work package.

Task 4.2 ECU manu­fact­uring and vali­dati­on
/ TECN­ALIA

TECN­ALIA will be resp­onsi­ble of manu­fact­uring and asse­mbli­ng the ECU vali­dati­on unit Hard­ware parts and comp­onen­ts defined during the deta­iled design stage and will be in charge of impl­emen­ting the Soft­ware needed to drive the elec­tric machine of the EMA and to impl­ement health Moni­to­ring func­tion­alit­ies to the system. Two ECUS will be asse­mble­d.

TECN­ALIA will also comm­issi­on the ECU, fine tuning the drive and control para­mete­rs and adju­sting the control loops by means of the mech­atro­nic simu­lati­ons that will have been cond­ucted during Task 3.2. A final labo­rato­ry vali­dati­on will take place at the end of the task incl­uding a phys­ical and func­tional insp­ecti­on process aimed at veri­fying that the asse­mbled ECUs are acce­ptab­le with regards to the requi­re­ments coll­ected in the spec­ific­atio­ns. Elec­trical outputs from the ECU will be meas­ured and regi­ster­ed at diff­erent labo­rato­ry scen­ario­s repr­esen­tati­ve of the spec­ified EMA miss­ions and conv­erted into elec­trical inputs to the ECU from the System ECU.

Vali­dati­on of elec­tron­ics at ECU level as well as EMA+ECU level will be perf­ormed by TECN­ALIA acco­rding to plan and proc­edur­es defined and agreed within the prev­ious work package.

Task 4.3 SECU manu­fact­uring and vali­dati­on
/ UMBRA

The acti­viti­es of this task will led to the manu­fact­uring of the SECU vali­dati­on unit acco­rding to design conc­lusi­on achi­eved in the task 3.3. Umbra is resp­onsi­ble of the SECU manu­fact­uring that will be made within the Umbra faci­liti­es. About 7 months have been cons­ider­ed for the manu­fact­uring of this unit.

SECU vali­dati­on will be perf­ormed acco­rding to plan and proc­edur­es defined and agreed.

Task 4.4 EHA demo­nstr­ator unit
/ TsAGI

The acti­viti­es of this task will led to the manu­fact­uring of EHA prot­otype with comb­ined control based on new control algo­rith­ms acco­rding to design conc­lusi­on achi­eved in the task 3.5. TsAGI is resp­onsi­ble for EHA manu­fact­uring that will be made with the help of subc­ontr­acto­rs MAI and Voskhod. Already exis­ting hydr­aulic part (hydr­aulic cyli­nder, reverse-control valve and pump) for EHA made at PMZ Voskhod and the new mech­atro­nic module (motor + its elec­tron­ic) with new control soft­ware deve­loped in TsAGI and MAI will be used to manu­fact­ure the new EHA prot­otyp­e.

EHA vali­dati­on will be perf­ormed acco­rding to plan and proc­edur­es defined and agreed.

Task 4.5 System test rig manu­fact­uring and set up
/ UAC

The test bench manu­fact­uring is the goal of this task. Its asse­mbly will be made within the Umbra factory in coll­abor­atio­n with TsAGI and UAC, leader of the task and who will part­icip­ate of mecha­nical part manu­fact­urin­g. Also for this task, about 7 months have been cons­ider­ed for the manu­fact­uring of this bench.

After a prel­imin­ary acce­ptan­ce test, the rig will be tran­sfer­red to CESA faci­liti­es where the expe­rime­ntal acti­viti­es will be impl­emen­ted and perf­orme­d. Init­iall­y spec­iali­zed tech­nici­ans of Umbra, TsAGI and/or UAC will assist during the tests, if nece­ssar­y.

All docu­men­tation needed to verify correct func­tion­ing (Acce­ptan­ce Test Report) as well as oper­atio­n manuals will be issued and deli­vered with the rig. Main­tena­nce manuals will be rele­ased if appl­icab­le or nece­ssar­y.

WP 5. System vali­dati­on & asse­ssment

Leader: CESA
Task 5.1 Vali­dati­on tests plan and proc­edures
/ TsAGI

The first task is the defi­niti­on of the test plan and proc­edur­es. The purpose of this acti­vity is the defi­niti­on of the diff­erent tests that need to be perf­orme­d. This test defi­niti­on is prod­uced in line with the conc­lusi­ons reached in task 1.5 actu­ators and System Test Rig requi­re­ments and spec­ific­atio­ns.

TsAGI is the leader of this acti­vity, which implies the iden­tifi­cati­on of the tests requ­ired, the defi­niti­on of such tests and writing of the docu­men­tation. This work will be done with the support of ONERA (resp­onsi­ble of the defi­niti­on of the test rig spec­ific­atio­n), CESA (resp­onsi­ble of the SECU defi­niti­on) and UMBRA/TECN­ALIA (co-resp­onsi­ble with CESA on the EMA design and manu­fact­ure), which part­icip­ate in the review of the docu­men­tation gene­rate­d.

Task 5.2 System test exec­utio­n, vali­dati­on and demo­stra­tion phase
/ CESA

This task corr­espo­nds to the perf­orma­nces of the tests as indi­cated in the task desc­ribed above. This task is perf­ormed by CESA at CESA faci­liti­es using the test rig manu­fact­ured in task T4.4 System Test Rig for the EMA/ECU-EHA/ECU-SECU. Alth­ough CESA is resp­onsi­ble of the exec­utio­n of the tests, ONERA, TsAGI, UMBRA and TECN­ALIA are also invo­lved in the supe­rvis­ion of tests that may require their inputs, (e.g. because of the crit­ical­ity of the tests, its comp­lexi­ty, or in order to solve some issues during the perf­orma­nce of these).

The tests to be perf­ormed will affect the whole system (i.e. EMA, EHA, ECU, SECU), with diff­erent comb­inat­ions of each, and would include at least the foll­owing tests (a more exha­usti­ve list will be prod­uced in 5.1):

Math­emat­ical models, anal­ysis and simu­lati­on vali­dati­on:

  • With the aim of prov­iding a totally func­tional math­emat­ical model the prev­ious vers­ions will be adju­sted and corr­elat­ed to conf­igure a final vali­dated model. If needed, ad-hoc Tests in open or closed loop conf­igur­atio­n will be carried out to adjust model key para­mete­rs and to ensure a good corr­elat­ion between the math­emat­ical model and the real comp­onent beha­viou­r.
  • Testing of active/passive and active/active actu­ators conf­igur­atio­ns.
  • actu­ators cons­umpt­ion.
  • Force-figh­ting inve­stig­atio­n.

Tests and vali­dati­on conc­erni­ng the force figh­ting cons­eque­nces when two actu­ators are trying to move the same control surface with asyn­chro­nous or anta­goni­st forces:

  • Safety and reli­abil­ity tests asso­ciat­ed to HUMS capa­bili­ties (system degr­adat­ion, failure simu­lati­on, etc…)
Task 5.3 Results anal­ysis and conc­lusi­ons
/ ONERA

Based on the safety, EMC, thermal asse­ssme­nt, stab­ilit­y margins of the “FCS-actu­ator-A/C” closed control loop asse­ssme­nts and the rest of the test results, the feas­ibil­ity of the diff­erent studied archi­tec­tu­res will be eval­uated in terms of actu­ator perf­orma­nces, overall system perf­orma­nce and its inte­grat­ion as well as A/C weight redu­ctio­n. Reco­mmen­dati­ons for future proj­ects will also be given in terms of EMA/EHA and local SMART-hydr­osys­tem tech­nolo­gies deve­lopm­ent, ways of addi­tional actu­atio­n system testing if nece­ssar­y and the most prom­ising types of flight control actu­atio­n system archi­tec­tu­res. This task is led by ONERA having inputs of all part­ners.

WP 6. Diss­emin­atio­n & expl­oita­tion

Leader: CESA
Task 6.1 Public aware­ness and diss­emin­atio­n
/ CESA

In this task the acti­viti­es conc­erned with the diss­emin­atio­n of the gene­rated know­ledge within the project towards the scie­ntif­ic and indu­strial comm­unit­ies will be planned in detail. Acti­viti­es such as paper subm­issi­on to scie­ntif­ic jour­nals, rele­vant conf­eren­ces, funded work­shop­s and semi­nars will be coor­dina­ted with the part­ners and acad­emic output of the project will be planned and moni­tore­d.

The RESE­ARCH Cons­orti­um will promote public aware­ness thro­ugho­ut the project to:

I. To spread the results that the project will achieve both to the largest poss­ible conc­erned audi­ence and to targ­eted stak­ehol­ders such as manu­fact­urer­s, prov­ider­s, rese­ar­chers, society, etc.

II. To enco­urage the diff­erent manu­fact­uring sectors and its supp­lier­s impl­emen­ting RESE­ARCH results by publ­ishi­ng them, dist­ribu­ting infor­ma­tion mate­rial to a wide audi­ence during trade fairs and inte­rnat­ional conf­eren­ces and most impo­rtan­tly through direct comm­unic­atio­n with all rele­vant inte­rest groups.

In addi­tion, the RESE­ARCH Cons­orti­um will prepare an aware­ness and diss­emin­atio­n plan and will update and deploy it along the project life and beyond. The Diss­emin­atio­n Plan will contain the foll­owing elem­ents:

  • Iden­tifi­cati­on and clas­sifi­cati­on of target stak­ehol­ders to be addr­esse­d.
  • The diss­emin­atio­n methods and their spec­ific asso­ciat­ed acti­viti­es.
  • Sche­dule and comp­leme­ntar­ily of the diss­emin­atio­n acti­viti­es among part­ners.
  • Indi­vidual diss­emin­atio­n plans.
  • The cond­itio­ns to ensure proper diss­emin­atio­n of the gene­rated know­ledg­e, related to conf­iden­tial­ity, publ­icat­ion and use of the know­ledg­e.

CESA will impl­ement an inte­rnet web plat­form, as a general comm­unic­atio­n plat­form, incl­uding infor­ma­tion for the general public but also to the scie­ntif­ic and indu­strial comm­unit­y. Cons­tant upda­ting of the plat­form along the project will allow inte­rest­ed parties follow the prog­ress of the project. Through the use of spec­iali­zed tools, it will be ensured that search engines will allo­cate the project website and display it in the first search results. CORDIS tools such as Cordis wire and Cordis News will be util­ized for wide comm­unic­atio­n of the project results. Project broc­hure will be created to promote RESE­ARCH project and faci­lita­te the diss­emin­atio­n of its results. Other means of public aware­ness will also be used such as press rele­ases, posters, etc. infor­ma­tion about the project will also be incl­uded in peri­odic news­lett­ers as well as other similar publ­icat­ions reac­hing a large part of the Euro­pean and Russian Aero­naut­ics comm­unit­y.

Task 6.2 Expl­oita­tion plan­ning
/ CESA

The expl­oita­tion stra­tegy will be here outl­ined both at a cons­orti­um level and at indi­vidual part­ners’ level. An initial expl­oita­tion plan will be prep­ared by month 12 which will be revised and updated by month 18 and at the end of the project. The content of the expl­oita­tion plan will be the foll­owin­g:

  • In-deep market anal­ysis for the appl­icat­ion of RESE­ARCH tech­nolo­gical deve­lopm­ents.
  • The asse­ssment of the expe­cted socio-econ­omic, envi­ronm­ental and energy impact of the know­ledge and tech­nolo­gy gene­rated and the factors that would infl­uence their expl­oita­tion.
  • Iden­tifi­cati­on of poss­ible tech­nical and non-tech­nical barr­iers to the expl­oita­tion of project results such as stan­dard­izat­ion, regu­lato­ry aspects, etc.
  • A meth­odol­ogy and stra­tegy for an appr­opri­ated mana­gement of the know­ledge gene­rated in the project and IPR prot­ecti­on.
  • IPR stra­tegy and prot­ecti­on acco­rding to the inte­rest of the part­ners and the Cons­orti­um Agre­emen­t.
  • Indi­vidual expl­oita­tion plans. Expl­oita­tion plans will be prep­ared spec­ific­ally for each tech­nolo­gical partner to develop a meth­odol­ogy and a stra­tegy for appr­opri­ate prod­ucts mark­etin­g. An anal­ysis and eval­uati­on of the expl­oita­tion pote­ntial and stra­tegy of the project results, routes for expl­oita­tion, the target users groups and markets, comp­etit­or anal­ysis, revi­ewing all aspects from the view­point of pote­ntial inve­stor­s, inte­rnal or exte­rnal, and mark­eting stra­tegi­es.
  • Cost-benefit feas­ibil­ity.

WP 7. Mana­geme­nt

Leaders: CESA, TsAGI
Task 7.1 Gove­rnan­ce stru­ctur­e, comm­unic­atio­n flow & methods
/ CESA, TsAGI
  • CESA will be resp­onsi­ble for esta­blis­hing an appr­opri­ate gove­rnan­ce stru­ctur­e. This task will cover the orga­nisa­tion of all formal meet­ings of the Project incl­uding the afte­rwar­ds circ­ulat­ion to all the Part­ners of the minutes and deci­sion­s taken in such meet­ings in order to promote and main­tain a good level of comm­unic­atio­n between the part­ners.
  • CESA will ensure the proper achi­evem­ent of mile­ston­es and deli­vera­bles, and gene­rall­y will deal comp­eten­tly and in a timely way with all mana­gement diff­icul­ties and issues, being resp­onsi­ble for the launch of cont­inge­ncy plans if nece­ssar­y.
  • CESA will provide the overall lead­ersh­ip for the Project and will be resp­onsi­ble for the prep­arat­ion and deli­very of the Project Mana­gement Plan and of all acti­vity prog­ress and project reports from inputs rece­ived from each of the Part­ners.
  • Risk anal­ysis and miti­gati­on will be also managed, as well as conf­lict miti­gati­on.
Task 7.2 Overall coor­dina­tion
/ CESA, TsAGI
  • CESA will conduct fina­ncia­l, legal and admi­nist­rati­ve coor­dina­tion acti­viti­es within the cons­orti­um and with EC. This task will include the esta­blis­hment of a sound legal fram­ewor­k for the Project incl­uding the EU cont­ract and the cons­orti­um agre­emen­t. They will also ensure the resp­onsi­ble, timely and audi­table use of all funds toge­ther with the prep­arat­ion, in liaison with the fina­ncial serv­ices of the Part­ners, of all fina­ncial stat­emen­ts and reports requ­ested by the Comm­issi­on.
  • They will also have primary resp­onsi­bili­ty for the spread of all nece­ssar­y docu­men­tation for the formal prog­ress reports requ­ired in the EU cont­ract, from inputs rece­ived from each of the part­ners. CESA will act as a focus point for all comm­unic­atio­n and exch­ange­s between the Project team and the Euro­pean Comm­issi­on.