可达区域内最佳着陆场的筛选方法

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2023.06.15

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对固定翼飞行器在可达区域内最佳应急着陆场选择问题, 通过构建普适性的指标体系，将上述问题转化为多属性评价问题, 并提出一种熵权灰色理想解逼近(technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution, TOPSIS)法对问题加以解决。从天气情况、着陆场特性、空域拥堵程度和地面保障能力4个方面进行分析, 细化为13个评价指标, 构建了应急着陆场评价指标体系。在传统TOPSIS的基础上, 分别使用熵权法和灰色关联度对权重计算和距离测度进行改进, 解决了传统方法依赖评价专家的主观赋权和采用欧式距离导致的无法评判优劣的问题。通过仿真对比, 体现了所提方法在权重确定方面的客观性和距离测度方面的准确性, 能够为飞行器应急着陆场的选择提供依据。

关键词: 应急着陆, 指标体系, 理想解逼近法, 熵权法, 灰色关联度

Abstract:

Aiming at the selection of the optimal emergency landing site in the reachable area of fixed-wing aircraft, the problem above is transformed into a multi-attribute evaluation problem by constructing a universal index system, and an entropy weight grey technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution(TOPSIS) is proposed to solve it. The evaluation index system of emergency landing site is constructed based on the analysis of weather conditions, landing site characteristics, airspace congestion degree and ground support capacity. On the basis of the TOPSIS, the entropy weight method and the grey correlation degree are used to improve the weight calculation and the distance measurement respectively, which solves the problems that the traditional method relies on the subjective weighting of the evaluation experts and cannot judge the advantages and disadvantages by using the Euclidean metric. The simulation results show that the proposed method is objective in weight determination and accurate in distance measurement, which can provide basis for the selection of aircraft emergency landing site.

Key words: emergency landing, index system, technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS), entropy weight method, grey correlation degree

中图分类号:

李昕泽, 周文雅, 刘凯, 王博. 可达区域内最佳着陆场的筛选方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2023, 45(6): 1712-1721.

Xinze LI, Wenya ZHOU, Kai LIU, Bo WANG. Screening method for the optimal landing site in the reachable area[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2023, 45(6): 1712-1721.

图/表 15

图1

表1

图2

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

图3

表8

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 33

33	HUI J Z , LEI J Y , WANG Y F , et al. Multiattribute decision-making evaluation method for highway steel bridge factory manufacturing[J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2021, 34 (6): 99- 108.
34	靳崇, 孙娟, 王永佳, 等. 基于直觉模糊TOPSIS和变权VIKOR的防空目标威胁综合评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44 (1): 172- 180.
	JIN C , SUN J , WANG Y J , et al. Threat comprehensive assessment for air defense targets based on intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS and variable weight VIKOR[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44 (1): 172- 180.
35	卢盈齐, 范成礼, 付强, 等. 基于改进IFRS相似度和信息熵的反导作战目标威胁评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44 (4): 1230- 1238.
	LU Y Q , FAN C L , FU Q , et al. Missile defense target threat assessment based on improved similarity measure and information entropy of IFRS[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44 (4): 1230- 1238.
36	XU Y H , CHENG S Y , ZHANG H B . Radiator threat evaluation with missing data based on improved technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution[J]. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 2021, 40 (3): 5433- 5442.
37	FANG K , WANG T T , ZHOU X L , et al. A TOPSIS-based relocalization algorithm in wireless sensor networks[J]. IEEE Trans.on Industrial Informatics, 2021, 18 (2): 1322- 1332.
38	WU G C , LI C , NIU X . Housing affordability evaluation based on the third-generation prospect theory and the improved VIKOR method[J]. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 2022, 42 (3): 1405- 1420.
39	CHEN P Y . Effects of the entropy weight on TOPSIS[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2021, 168, 114186.
40	罗毅, 李昱龙. 基于熵权法和灰色关联分析法的输电网规划方案综合决策[J]. 电网技术, 2013, 37 (1): 77- 81.
	LUO Y , LI Y L . Comprehensive decision-making of transmi-ssion network planning based on entropy weight and grey relational analysis[J]. Power System Technology, 2013, 37 (1): 77- 81.
1	ATKINS E M , PORTILLO I A , STRUBE M J . Emergency flight planning applied to total loss of thrust[J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2006, 43 (4): 1205- 1216. doi: 10.2514/1.18816
2	徐道琦, 费景荣. 某型轰炸机空滑迫降分析[J]. 沈阳航空工业学院学报, 2005, 22 (1): 7- 10. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1248.2005.01.003
	XU D Q , FEI J R . Forced landing analysis of some kind bomber[J]. Journal of Shenyang Institute of Aeronautical Engineering, 2005, 22 (1): 7- 10. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1248.2005.01.003
3	汪朝东, 黄天彬. 遂宁机场起落航线发动机失效处置探讨[J]. 中国民航飞行学院学报, 2013, 24 (1): 32- 35.
	WANG C D , HUANG T B . Disposal of engine failure in traffic pattern in Suining airfield[J]. Journal of Civil Aviation Flight University of China, 2013, 24 (1): 32- 35.
4	SUN X , LIU H , TIAN Y L , et al. Team effectiveness evaluation and virtual reality scenario mapping model for helicopter emergency rescue[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2020, 33 (12): 3306- 3317. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2020.06.003
5	吕明云, 孙康文, 马云鹏, 等. 基于不确定性的设计方案经济可承受性分析[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2010, 36 (1): 118- 122.
	LYU M Y , SUN K W , MA Y P , et al. Economic affordability of aircraft conceptual/preliminary scheme based on uncertainty[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2010, 36 (1): 118- 122.
6	ZHOU Z Y , KIZIL M , CHEN Z W , et al. A new approach for selecting best development face ventilation mode based on G1-coefficient of variation method[J]. Journal of Central South University, 2018, 25 (10): 2462- 2471. doi: 10.1007/s11771-018-3929-y
7	殷春武. 无人飞行器航迹方案的VIKOR择优评价[J]. 控制与决策, 2020, 35 (12): 2950- 2958.
	YIN C W . Unmanned aerial vehicle path scheme optimal evaluation based-VIKOR[J]. Control and Decision, 2020, 35 (12): 2950- 2958.
41	SHANNON C E . A mathematical theory of communication[J]. Bell System Technical Journal, 1948, 27 (4): 623- 656.
42	申卯兴, 薛西锋, 张小水. 灰色关联分析中分辨系数的选取[J]. 空军工程大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, 4 (1): 68- 70.
	SHEN M X , XUE X F , ZHANG X S . Determination of discrimination coefficient in grey incidence analysis[J]. Journal of Air Force Engineering University (Natural Science Edition), 2003, 4 (1): 68- 70.
8	李恒璐, 陈伯孝, 丁一, 等. 基于信息熵权的最近邻域数据关联算法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42 (4): 806- 812.
	LI H L , CHEN B X , DING Y , et al. Nearest neighbor data association algorithm based on information entropy weight[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42 (4): 806- 812.
9	SUN H W , XIE X F . Threat evaluation method of warships formation air defense based on AR(p)-DITOPSIS[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30 (2): 297- 307. doi: 10.21629/JSEE.2019.02.09
10	LI H L , LI D , LI Y H . A multi-index assessment method for evaluating coverage effectiveness of remote sensing satellite[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2018, 31 (10): 2023- 2033. doi: 10.1016/j.cja.2018.05.015
11	邵瑞瑞, 方志耕, 刘思峰, 等. 铱星星座效能评估BDP-ADC模型[J]. 控制与决策, 2021, 36 (3): 733- 740.
	SHAO R R , FANG Z G , LIU S F , et al. BDP-ADC model for Iridium constellation effectiveness evaluation[J]. Control and Decision, 2021, 36 (3): 733- 740.
12	FENG J F , ZHANG Q , HU J H , et al. Dynamic assessment method of air target threat based on improved GIFSS[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 30 (3): 525- 534. doi: 10.21629/JSEE.2019.03.10
13	于亮, 方志耕, 吴利丰, 等. 基于灰色类别差异特性的评价指标客观权重极大熵配置模型[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2014, 34 (8): 2065- 2070.
	YU L , FANG Z G , WU L F , et al. Maximum entropy confi-guration model of objective index weight based on grey category characteristics difference[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2014, 34 (8): 2065- 2070.
14	MAHAJAN V , LINSTONE H A , TUROFF M . The Delphi method: techniques and applications[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1976, 13 (3): 317- 318.
15	张仲敏, 李俊山, 宋凭, 等. 一种基于模糊层次分析的多Agent电子对抗装备状态智能评判方法[J]. 兵工学报, 2014, 35 (4): 516- 522. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2014.04.013
	ZHANG Z M , LI J S , SONG P , et al. A multi-agent intelligent decision approach based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for service status of electronic countermeasures equipment[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2014, 35 (4): 516- 522. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2014.04.013
16	赵曰强, 安实, 麦强, 等. 基于ADC法的防空导弹武器系统效能建模[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42 (9): 2003- 2012.
	ZHAO Y Q , AN S , MAI Q , et al. Effectiveness modeling of air defense missile weapon system based on ADC method[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42 (9): 2003- 2012.
17	SAATY T L . Modeling unstructured decision problems: the theory of analytical hierarchies[J]. Mathematics and Compu-ters in Simulation, 1978, 20 (3): 147- 158. doi: 10.1016/0378-4754(78)90064-2
18	李明, 罗国华, 姜春兰, 等. 基于AHP-TOPSIS的网络化弹药攻击决策算法[J]. 北京理工大学学报, 2017, 37 (12): 1315- 1320.
	LI M , LUO G H , JIANG C L , et al. Algorithm of networked ammunition attack decision-making based on AHP-TOPSIS[J]. Transactions of Beijing Institute of Technology, 2017, 37 (12): 1315- 1320.
19	杨建峰, 肖和业, 李亮, 等. 基于模糊聚类和专家评分机制的无人机多层次模块划分方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44 (8): 2530- 2539.
	YANG J F , XIAO H Y , LI L , et al. Multi-level module partition method of UAV based on fuzzy clustering and expert scoring mechanism[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44 (8): 2530- 2539.
20	ARDAKANIA H H , SHOJAEI S , SHAHVARAN A R , et al. Selecting potential locations for groundwater recharge by means of remote sensing and GIS and weighting based on Boolean logic and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2022, 81, 8. doi: 10.1007/s12665-021-10071-4
21	SUN L G , ZHOU Q , JIA B X , et al. Effective control allocation using hierarchical multi-objective optimization for multi-phase flight[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2020, 33 (7): 2002- 2013.
22	FEI C W , LIU H T , PATRICIA L R , et al. Hierarchical model updating strategy of complex assembled structures with uncorrelated dynamic modes[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2022, 35 (3): 281- 296.
23	YAO T L , MIAO R , WANG W L , et al. Synthetic damage effect assessment through evidential reasoning approach and neural fuzzy inference: application in ship target[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2022, 35 (8): 143- 157.
24	董宾, 王涛, 徐永成, 等. 基于模糊评价法的某型跨超声速风洞增量引射器维修方案评价研究[J]. 兵工学报, 2014, 35 (8): 1295- 1300.
	DONG B , WANG T , XU Y C , et al. Research on maintenance scheme of a trans-supersonic wind tunnel augmentation ejector based on fuzzy evaluation method[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2014, 35 (8): 1295- 1300.
25	YAO T L , WANG W L , MIAO R , et al. Warhead power assessment based on double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets theory and gained and lost dominance score method[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2022, 35 (4): 362- 375.
26	范琪, 郑佳锋, 周鼎富, 等. 基于激光测风雷达的机场低空风切变识别算法[J]. 红外与毫米波学报, 2020, 39 (4): 462- 472.
	FAN Q , ZHENG J F , ZHOU D F , et al. Research on airport low-level wind shear identification algorithm based on laser wind radar[J]. Journal of Infrared and Millimeter Waves, 2020, 39 (4): 462- 472.
27	邓聚龙. 灰理论基础[M]. 武汉: 华中科技大学出版社, 2002.
	DENG J L . Fundation of gray theory[M]. Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press, 2002.
28	PAHANGE H , ABOLBASHARI M H . Mass and performance optimization of an airplane wing leading edge structure against bird strike using Taguchi-based grey relational analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2016, 29 (4): 934- 944.
29	李德毅, 刘常昱. 论正态云模型的普适性[J]. 中国工程科学, 2004, 6 (8): 28- 34.
	LI D Y , LIU C Y . Study on the universality of the normal cloud model[J]. Engineering Science, 2004, 6 (8): 28- 34.
30	LIAW C F , HSU J W C , LO H W . A hybrid MCDM model to evaluate and classify outsourcing providers in manufacturing[J]. Symmetry, 2020, 12 (12): 1962.
31	NAEEM K , RIAZ M , KARAASLAN F . A mathematical approach to medical diagnosis via Pythagorean fuzzy soft TOPSIS, VIKOR and generalized aggregation operators[J]. Complex and Intelligent Systems, 2021, 7 (5): 2783- 2795. doi: 10.1007/s40747-021-00458-y
32	崔宁博, 张振平, 楼豫红, 等. 基于TOPSIS的区域农业节水发展水平综合评价模型[J]. 应用基础与工程科学学报, 2016, 24 (5): 978- 994.
	CUI N B , ZHANG Z P , LOU Y H , et al. Evaluation model of comprehensive agricultural water-saving development level based on TOPSIS in a regional area[J]. Journal of Basic Science and Engineering, 2016, 24 (5): 978- 994.
33	惠记庄, 雷景媛, 王亚飞, 等. 公路桥梁钢结构工厂化制造多属性决策评价方法[J]. 中国公路学报, 2021, 34 (6): 99- 108.

跑道材质类别	数值
混凝土	1.0
沥青	1.0
合金	0.5
砖	0.5
木材	0.2
草皮	0.1
碎石	0.1

评价指标	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
C₁/m	6 000.00	6 000.00	5 000.00	4 000.00	3 000.00	6 000.00	6 000.00	5 000.00
C₂	1.00	2.00	3.00	6.00	7.00	3.00	2.00	1.00
C₃/(m·s^－1)	2.40	4.40	3.50	1.00	2.50	0.70	1.40	1.20
C₄/个	23.00	22.00	33.00	44.00	79.00	16.00	17.00	10.00
C₅	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
C₆/m	3 300.00	3 400.00	3 600.00	3 800.00	3 600.00	3 400.00	3 400.00	3 600.00
C₇/mm	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.30	0.00	0.00	0.00
C₈/架	50.00	87.00	202.00	216.00	693.00	34.00	46.00	54.00
C₉/架	25.00	46.00	103.00	122.00	359.00	17.00	22.00	27.00
C₁₀/km	428.00	426.00	433.00	431.00	428.00	433.00	429.00	430.00
C₁₁/min	20.08	30.90	19.78	26.62	27.76	25.37	26.66	33.39
C₁₂/%	79.15	68.16	82.14	80.84	81.24	60.52	70.56	70.06
C₁₃/辆	6.00	6.00	7.00	6.00	8.00	8.00	7.00	6.00

评价指标	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
C₁/m	0.007 0	0.007 0	0.005 9	0.004 7	0.003 5	0.007 0	0.007 0	0.005 9
C₂	0.078 8	0.065 6	0.052 5	0.013 1	0	0.052 5	0.065 6	0.078 8
C₃/(m·s^－1)	0.043 1	0	0.019 4	0.073 3	0.041 0	0.079 8	0.064 7	0.069 0
C₄/个	0.033 3	0.031 9	0.047 8	0.063 8	0.114 5	0.023 2	0.024 6	0.014 5
C₅	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
C₆/m	2.4×10^-4	2.5×10^-4	2.6×10^-4	2.8×10^-4	2.6×10^-4	2.5×10^-4	2.5×10^-4	2.6×10^-4
C₇/mm	0.038 2	0.038 2	0.038 2	0.038 2	0	0.038 2	0.038 2	0.038 2
C₈/架	0.043 3	0.040 8	0.033 1	0.032 1	0	0.044 4	0.043 6	0.043 1
C₉/架	0.043 9	0.041 1	0.033 6	0.031 1	0	0.044 9	0.044 3	0.043 6
C₁₀/km	3.9×10^-6	3.9×10^-6	4.0×10^-6	4.0×10^-6	3.9×10^-6	4.0×10^-6	3.9×10^-6/min	3.9×10^-6
C₁₁/min	0.104 6	0.019 6	0.106 9	0.053 2	0.044 2	0.063 0	0.052 9	0
C₁₂/%	0.001 4	0.001 2	0.001 5	0.001 5	0.001 5	0.001 1	0.001 3	0.001 3
C₁₃/辆	0.001 8	0.001 8	0.002 0	0.001 8	0.002 3	0.002 3	0.002 0	0.001 8

欧式距离	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
与正理想解的欧式距离	0.089 1	0.145 0	0.095 1	0.100 8	0.130 8	0.104 6	0.106 7	0.146 8
与负理想解的欧式距离	0.156 9	0.099 1	0.139 2	0.119 5	0.116 8	0.136 5	0.129 3	0.127 2

灰关联度	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
与正理想解的灰关联度	0.802 8	0.654 2	0.671 7	0.606 9	0.553 7	0.789 2	0.720 1	0.747 0
与负理想解的灰关联度	0.486 8	0.573 5	0.497 3	0.516 0	0.777 4	0.496 5	0.495 8	0.626 0