面向定性与定量指标的轻量化高空飞艇效能评估方法

doi:10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2025.03.14

系统工程与电子技术 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (3): 817-826.doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2025.03.14

• 系统工程 • 上一篇

面向定性与定量指标的轻量化高空飞艇效能评估方法

袁彰求¹^,²^,³, 杨朝旭¹^,²^,³, 荣海军¹^,²^,³^,*

1. 西安交通大学航天航空学院, 陕西西安 710049
2. 西安交通大学陕西省先进飞行器服役环境与控制重点实验室, 陕西西安 710049
3. 西安交通大学复杂服役环境重大装备结构强度与寿命全国重点实验室, 陕西西安 710049

收稿日期:2024-02-20 出版日期:2025-03-28 发布日期:2025-04-18
通讯作者: 荣海军
作者简介:袁彰求 (2000—), 男, 硕士研究生, 主要研究方向为效能评估、数据挖掘
杨朝旭 (1989—), 男, 副教授, 博士, 主要研究方向为效能评估、智能控制
荣海军 (1978—), 女, 教授, 博士, 主要研究方向为效能评估、模糊系统
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(61976172);国家自然科学基金(12002254);陕西省重点研发计划(2023-YBGY-235)

Lightweight effectiveness evaluation method for high altitude airships for both qualitative and quantitative indicators

Zhangqiu YUAN¹^,²^,³, Zhaoxu YANG¹^,²^,³, Haijun RONG¹^,²^,³^,*

1. School of Aerospace Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China
2. Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Environment and Control for Flight Vehicle, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China
3. State Key Laboratory for Strength and Vibration of Mechanical Structures, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China

Received:2024-02-20 Online:2025-03-28 Published:2025-04-18
Contact: Haijun RONG

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

高空飞艇具有驻空时间长、能源消耗低等优点, 在面对信息监测和长期通信方面有很高的应用价值。综合考虑飞艇平台与载荷在指标上的耦合关系, 提出一种面向定性与定量指标的轻量化高空飞艇效能评估方法。首先, 运用模糊综合评估法将无法直接用于数据分析的定性指标转化为定量指标, 实现多类型指标的完全量化。其次, 通过基于模糊C均值聚类的最大信息系数相关性分析选择与关注指标相关的指标, 构建轻量评估体系。再次, 提出专家排序评价的主客观组合赋权法, 基于轻量评估体系计算权重获得效能评估结果。最后, 通过实例验证所提效能评估方法的有效性。所提出的轻量化高空飞艇效能评估方法可为高空飞艇的设计和优化提供数据支持, 缩短研发周期、降低经济成本。

关键词: 效能评估, 模糊综合评估法, 模糊C均值聚类, 最大信息系数, 组合赋权法

Abstract:

High altitude airships possess advantages such as long endurance in the air and low energy consumption, making them highly valuable for applications in information monitoring and long-term communication. Considering the coupling between the airship platform and payload in terms of performance indicators, a lightweight effectiveness evaluation method is proposed, integrating both qualitative and quantitative indicators. First, the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is employed to transform qualitative indicators, which cannot be directly used for data analysis, into quantitative indicators, thereby achieving complete quantification of multiple types of indicators. Next, through maximum information coefficient correlation analysis based on fuzzy C-means clustering, select indicators related to the focus indicators and construct a scientific lightweight evaluation system. Then, a combined subjective and objective weighting method based on expert ranking evaluation is proposed, and the effectiveness evaluation results are obtained by calculating weights based on the lightweight evaluation system. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed effectiveness evaluation method is verified through a case study. This lightweight effectiveness evaluation method can support high altitude airship design and optimization, helping to shorten development cycles and reduce costs.

Key words: effectiveness evaluation, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, fuzzy C-means clustering, maximum information coefficient, combined weighting method

中图分类号:

TP391.9

袁彰求, 杨朝旭, 荣海军. 面向定性与定量指标的轻量化高空飞艇效能评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2025, 47(3): 817-826.

Zhangqiu YUAN, Zhaoxu YANG, Haijun RONG. Lightweight effectiveness evaluation method for high altitude airships for both qualitative and quantitative indicators[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2025, 47(3): 817-826.

图/表 9

图1

图2

图3

图4

表1

表2

各型号的高空飞艇数据"

效能评估指标		型号数据
准则层	指标层	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20
飞艇平台性能	机动性能	49.4	51.3	112	55.3	109.8	109.9	133.8	73.4	109.7	127.5	72.1	88.9	63.2	105.5	129.1	85.3	147.9	48.7	88.7	144.1
	巡航速度/(km/h)	29.6	30.5	61.4	32	58.6	58.8	72.3	41	59.4	68	33	48.8	36	57	68	46	79	28.9	47.5	75
	最大航速/(km/h)	55	59	110	66	103	105.6	118	77	103	121	57	94	68	97	109	92	134	58.4	91	128
	抗摧毁能力	26	27.2	44.6	28	42.1	41.3	55.3	33	42.9	54.2	28.3	37.9	29.8	41.3	55.1	36.3	60	25.5	37.1	58.7
	发动机排气量/cc	86	121	173	87.4	176	153	167	62	76	93	124	80	129	153	200	118	195	61	67	187
	发动机功率/马力	7.3	12	15.3	8	16.5	12.3	13.6	5.4	7.8	8.4	12.3	6.7	11.2	15	18	10	14	5.2	6	19
	驻空高度/m	1 480.0	1 359.0	1 200.0	1 345.0	1 467.0	1 347.0	1 345.0	1 455.0	1 456.0	1 245.0	1 323.0	1 423.0	1 342.0	1 433.0	1 324.0	1 432.0	1 544.0	1 534.0	1 234.0	1 469.0
	驻空时长/h	180.0	220.0	367.0	165.0	330.0	278.0	365.0	238.0	278.0	347.0	220.0	275.0	277.0	318.0	418.0	270.0	440.0	216.0	312.0	345.0
飞艇可靠性	平均寿命/d	1876	1765	3242	1865	3214	2907	3366	2197	2854	3254	1987	2546	1967	3214	3324	2657	3765	1879	2376	3486
	平均无故障时间/d	176	167	330	183	301	321	356	187	314	368	165	219	187	319	371	222	401	181	231	389
	控制系统可靠性	69.4	69.6	132	75.2	130	131	154.9	94.2	131	151	92.2	109.2	83.1	123.2	149.2	105.3	167.2	68.4	109.4	164.2
	电系统环境适应性	70.2	69.4	56.2	68.1	57.4	57.1	49.2	64.5	56.4	52.9	67.2	63.9	67.5	53.5	51.6	67.6	46.5	73.4	62.5	47.2
	检修时长/min	97.0	142.0	146.0	67.0	231.0	123.0	186.0	137.0	138.0	148.0	143.0	145.0	175.0	185.0	232.0	131.0	245.0	121.0	128.0	156.0
	最大抗风能力	3.8	4.4	5.7	3.6	5.7	5.5	5.9	5.1	5.5	5.5	4.0	5.9	5.3	5.7	5.9	5.2	5.9	4.1	5.8	6.3
	被动防护响应效率	67.0	58.0	68.0	68.0	58.0	68.0	71.0	67.0	58.0	60.0	72.0	69.0	66.0	85.0	72.0	59.0	55.0	57.0	55.0	65.0
载荷稳定性	气体环境适应性	9.6	9.5	4.8	9.5	5.3	5.2	2.9	8.8	5.2	3.3	9.5	7.3	9.2	6.2	3.2	8.2	1.0	9.6	8.3	2.0
	抗干扰能力	18	18.2	24.3	18.5	23.4	23.8	26.8	21	23.7	25.7	19.2	21.7	19.1	23.7	25.8	22	28	17.8	21.5	27
	机载设备可靠性	88.2	88.4	94.3	88.8	93.4	93.6	96.3	90.3	93.5	95.3	89	91.7	89.5	93.6	95.6	91.5	97.8	87.8	91.7	97
	温度适应性	76.0	45.0	57.0	75.0	43.0	66.0	65.0	78.0	65.0	67.0	54.0	47.0	56.0	76.0	67.0	74.0	65.0	66.0	69.0	71.0
	抗辐射能力	95.0	89.0	77.0	80.0	94.0	92.0	85.0	94.0	84.0	89.0	93.0	92.0	92.0	81.0	92.0	91.0	85.0	83.0	92.0	83.0
载荷侦察能力	处理信息能力	7.0	6.9	5.6	6.9	5.7	5.8	4.8	6.5	5.4	5.3	7.0	6.4	6.8	5.6	5.2	6.8	4.7	7.3	6.3	4.8
	视野范围	190	192	221	196	224	230	253	201	227	260	198	212	199	221	265	210	280	197	216	276
	识别准确率/%	50.0	51.0	92.0	56.0	88.0	87.0	94.0	60.0	85.0	92.9	57.0	79.0	61.0	91.0	95.0	77.0	98.0	55.0	78.9	93.0
	信息融合能力	78.0	87.0	88.0	78.0	89.0	76.0	78.0	87.0	86.0	87.0	79.0	87.0	89.0	77.0	78.0	65.0	86.0	86.0	89.0	76.0
飞艇载荷能力	艇囊容积/m³	27	46.7	88.6	25.7	87.9	68	108	48	68	90	33	55	45	66	110	52	94	34	53	103
飞艇载荷能力	最大载重量/kg	3	10	25	3.6	22.4	20	30	11	20	26.4	5	9.8	12	21	33	12	24	7	15.8	31

表2

图5

表3

表4

参考文献 31

1	HU S X , ZHANG A W , CHAI S T . ASQ-MPHAAS: multi-payload observation system from high altitude airship[J]. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2019, 19 (24): 12353- 12362. doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2937804
2	YAN K , JIANG J , SUN M W , et al. Coordinated symmetrical altitude position and attitude control for stratospheric airship subject to strong aerodynamic uncertainties[J]. Symmetry, 2023, 15 (6): 1260. doi: 10.3390/sym15061260
3	JING Y H , YANG Z H , ZHOU P F , et al. Cooperative deployment multi-objective optimization approach for high-resolution multi-airship earth-observation coverage network[J]. IEEE Trans. on Network Science and Engineering, 2023, 10 (6): 3435- 3449.
4	CHEN Y L , SHEN S P , HU Z K , et al. Fixed-point control of airships based on a characteristic model: a data-driven approach[J]. Mathematics, 2023, 11 (2): 310. doi: 10.3390/math11020310
5	HU S X , WANG B K , ZHANG A W , et al. Genetic algorithm and greedy strategy-based multi-mission-point route planning for heavy-duty semi-rigid airship[J]. Sensors, 2022, 22 (13): 4954. doi: 10.3390/s22134954
6	XU J P , MENG Z Y , XU L . ISHM-oriented hierarchical effectiveness evaluation approach for spacecraft avionics[J]. IEEE Systems Journal, 2014, 9 (2): 461- 473.
7	BOUZIAT T, CAMPS V, COMBETTES S. A cooperative SoS architecting approach based on adaptive multi-agent systems[C]// Proc. of the 6th International Workshop on Software Engineering for Systems-of-Systems, 2018: 8-16.
8	马骏, 杨镜宇, 吴曦. 基于预聚类主动半监督的作战体系效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44 (6): 1889- 1896. doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2022.06.15
	MA J , YANG J Y , WU X . Evaluation of operational system of systems effectiveness based on pre-clustering active semi-supervised learning[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44 (6): 1889- 1896. doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2022.06.15
9	SUN Y K , FANG Z G . Research on projection gray target model based on FANP-QFD for weapon system of systems capability evaluation[J]. IEEE Systems Journal, 2020, 15 (3): 4126- 4136.
10	邱禄芸, 方志耕, 陶良彦, 等. 网络体系效能评估改进FDNA模型[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44 (12): 3728- 3737. doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2022.12.17
	QIU L Y , FANG Z G , TAO L Y , et al. Effectiveness evaluation of network SoS based on improved FDNA model[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2022, 44 (12): 3728- 3737. doi: 10.12305/j.issn.1001-506X.2022.12.17
11	SONG L N , SHI D X , XIA J Q , et al. Spatial-aware dynamic lightweight self-supervised monocular depth estimation[J]. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2023, 9 (1): 883- 890.
12	LI G Z , ZHANG A N , ZHANG Q Z , et al. Pearson correlation coefficient-based performance enhancement of broad learning system for stock price prediction[J]. IEEE Trans. on Circuits and Systems Ⅱ: Express Briefs, 2022, 69 (5): 2413- 2417.
13	ZHANG D H , YANG Y C , LIU Y M , et al. Hybrid HVDC line pilot protection method based on EMD and Spearman correlation coefficient[J]. Power System Protection and Control, 2021, 49 (9): 1- 11.
14	SZEKELY G J , RIZZO M L , BAKIROV N K . Measuring and testing dependence by correlation of distances[J]. The Annals of Statistics, 2007, 35 (6): 2769- 2794.
15	RUAN S F , CHEN B Z , SONG K F , et al. Weighted naive Bayes text classification algorithm based on improved distance correlation coefficient[J]. Neural Computing and Applications, 2022, 34 (4): 2729- 2738.
16	ASGHARIVASKASI A , ATANASOV N . Semantic OcTree map and Shannon mutual information computation for robot exploration[J]. IEEE Trans. on Robotics, 2023, 39 (3): 1910- 1928.
17	CHEN B , WANG J , LV Y Y , et al. Device-free wireless sensing with few labels through mutual information maximization[J]. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2024, 11 (6): 10513- 10524.
18	RESHEF D , RESHEF Y , FINUCANE H K , et al. Detecting novel associations in large data sets[J]. Science, 2011, 334 (6062): 1518- 1524.
19	ZHANG Q Y, ZHANG W, LI Q Q, et al. Research on the flexibility of carrier-based aircraft equipment system based on complex network theory[C]//Proc. of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing, Automation and Systems, 2019: 253-257.
20	ZHANG D , JIA L M , NING J , et al. Power grid structure performance evaluation based on complex network cascade failure analysis[J]. Energies, 2023, 16 (2): 990.
21	LEI M , DONG Y F , LI Z , et al. Application of a modified BPS neural network based on three-way decision theory in an effectiveness evaluation for a remote sensing satellite cluster[J]. Remote Sensing, 2023, 15 (13): 3305.
22	JIAO W H . Performance evaluation of state-owned enterprises based on fuzzy neural network combination model[J]. Soft Computing, 2022, 26 (20): 11105- 11113.
23	季玉琦, 谢欢, 史少彧, 等. 基于EWM-AHP-BP神经网络的地区电网电压无功组合评价[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2023, 35 (4): 843- 852.
	JI Y Q , XIE H , SHI S Y , et al. Voltage and reactive power combinational evaluation of regional power grid based on EWM-AHP-BP neural network[J]. Journal of System Simulation, 2023, 35 (4): 843- 852.
24	HAN F , LIU Z L , WANG C X , et al. Research on optimization method of railway construction scheme based on multidimensional combination weighting and improved grey theory[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14 (1): 3023.
25	WANG J , HAO Y L , YANG C . A comprehensive prediction model for VHF radio wave propagation by integrating entropy weight theory and machine learning methods[J]. IEEE Trans. on Antennas and Propagation, 2023, 97 (7): 6249- 6254.
26	周依希, 李晓明, 瞿合祚. 基于反熵-AHP二次规划组合赋权法的电网节点综合脆弱性评估[J]. 电力自动化设备, 2019, 39 (7): 133- 140.
	ZHOU Y X , LI X M , QU H Z . Comprehensive vulnerability assessment of power grid nodes based on the combination weighting method of anti entropy AHP quadratic programming[J]. Power Automation Equipment, 2019, 39 (7): 133- 140.
27	FAN L , SPIRKOVA J , MESIAR R , et al. Multi-criteria fuzzy comprehensive evaluation in interval environment with dual preferences[J]. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 2020, 39 (1): 1361- 1369.
28	SHI Z G , ZUO Z Y , DONG R N . Low-altitude scaled similarity analysis and flight tests of near space airships with pressure resistance mechanism[J]. Advances in Space Research, 2023, 72 (6): 2324- 2335.
29	DU H F , LI J , ZHU W Y , et al. Thermal performance analysis and comparison of stratospheric airships with rotatable and fixed photovoltaic array[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2018, 158, 373- 386.
30	JIAO J J , WANG X P , WEI T Y , et al. An adaptive fuzzy C-means noise image segmentation algorithm combining local and regional information[J]. IEEE Trans. on Fuzzy Systems, 2023, 31 (8): 2645- 2657.
31	Feiyu Aviation Science and Technology Ltd. Company product[EB/OL]. [2024-02-20]. http://fyft.com/products.shtml.

S	Sz	Sc	Sa	Sq	a_{2, 2}
Sz	1	1/2	4	3	0.288 4
Sc	2	1	7	5	0.532 9
Sa	1/4	1/7	1	1/2	0.067 4
Sq	1/3	1/5	2	1	0.111 3

型号	本文方法效能评估值	文献[23]效能评估值	文献[26]效能评估值
1	0.143 2	0.258 6	0.274 8
2	0.170 4	0.366 8	0.282 5
3	0.613 4	0.472 2	0.501 8
4	0.181 9	0.251 6	0.241 5
5	0.572 1	0.427 6	0.510 2
6	0.562 0	0.465 2	0.452 6
7	0.745 6	0.503 2	0.551 9
8	0.296 5	0.413 4	0.394 0
9	0.545 5	0.480 6	0.503 1
10	0.724 5	0.597 4	0.525 8
11	0.213 7	0.366 8	0.321 1
12	0.410 9	0.458 6	0.446 2
13	0.247 1	0.372 2	0.382 1
14	0.544 6	0.451 6	0.491 1
15	0.748 5	0.509 6	0.574 8
16	0.419 0	0.490 3	0.453 2
17	0.835 6	0.568 3	0.673 8
18	0.174 3	0.313 4	0.266 8
19	0.414 3	0.480 6	0.434 0
20	0.809 0	0.597 4	0.636 9

[1]	郑丽莎, 尹东亮, 王旋. 基于改进D-S证据理论的相控阵雷达作战效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2024, 46(4): 1330-1336.
[2]	马力, 师鹏, 陈宇, 李文龙. 天基信息支援体系离散事件仿真与效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2024, 46(3): 906-913.
[3]	胡涛, 申立群, 朱镜达, 孙成会, 董伟锋. 基于FAST和Sobol指数法的雷达系统效能敏感性分析[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2024, 46(2): 561-569.
[4]	陈宇, 师鹏, 马力, 李文龙. 天基信息支援体系建模与效能评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2024, 46(10): 3407-3415.
[5]	曹嘉平, 欧萌歆, 李易珊, 姜江, 李际超. 岛礁防空电子对抗装备体系构建与效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2023, 45(9): 2784-2792.
[6]	浣顺启, 方哲梅, 王剑波. 基于功能依赖网的体系效能评估方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(7): 2191-2200.
[7]	蔺向阳, 邢清华, 刘付显. 针对要点防空模型的作战兵力优化研究[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(3): 921-928.
[8]	邱禄芸, 方志耕, 陶良彦, 陶秋澄. 网络体系效能评估改进FDNA模型[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(12): 3728-3737.
[9]	韩亚娟, 章露露, 雷小虎. 基于改进FDOD度量的航空发动机健康状况评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2022, 44(11): 3579-3586.
[10]	潘星, 张振宇, 张艳梅, 王冉冉. 基于Sobol敏感性分析的装备体系保障效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(2): 390-398.
[11]	高昂, 郭齐胜, 董志明, 杨绍卿. 基于EAS+MADRL的多无人车体系效能评估方法研究[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(12): 3643-3651.
[12]	杨圩生, 王钰, 杨洋, 唐亮. 基于作战环的不同节点攻击策略下的作战网络效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(11): 3220-3228.
[13]	韩驰, 熊伟. 基于改进灰狼算法优化SVR的航天侦察装备效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2021, 43(10): 2902-2910.
[14]	李彪, 王立文, 邢志伟, 罗谦. 过站航班地面保障流程效能评估[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(7): 1543-1549.
[15]	田睿, 范祥祥, 戴影, 孙宪兵, 董绪荣. 核模糊C均值聚类算法优选BDS-3三频组合观测值[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(3): 686-697.

面向定性与定量指标的轻量化高空飞艇效能评估方法

Lightweight effectiveness evaluation method for high altitude airships for both qualitative and quantitative indicators

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价