aerospace

Article
Design of the Electronic Engine Control Unit Performance Test
System of Aircraft
Seonghee Kho 1 and Hyunbum Park 2, *

1 Department of Defense Science & Technology-Aeronautics, Howon University, 64 Howondae 3gil, Impi,
Gunsan 54058, Korea; [email protected]
2 School of Mechanical Convergence System Engineering, Kunsan National University, 558 Daehak-ro,
Miryong-dong, Gunsan 54150, Korea
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-(0)63-469-4729

Abstract: In this study, a real-time engine model and a test bench were developed to verify the
performance of the EECU (electronic engine control unit) of a turbofan engine. The target engine
is a DGEN 380 developed by the Price Induction company. The functional verification of the test
bench was carried out using the developed test bench. An interface and interworking test between
the test bench and the developed EECU was carried out. After establishing the verification test
environments, the startup phase control logic of the developed EECU was verified using the real-
time engine model which modeled the startup phase test data with SIMULINK. Finally, it was
confirmed that the developed EECU can be used as a real-time engine model for the starting section
of performance verification.

Keywords: test bench; EECU (electronic engine control unit); turbofan engine







Citation: Kho, S.; Park, H. Design of 1. Introduction

the Electronic Engine Control Unit The EECU is a very important component in aircraft engines, and the verification
Performance Test System of Aircraft. test for numerous items should be carried out in its development process. Since it takes
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158. https://
a lot of time and cost to carry out such verification test using an actual engine, and an
doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060158
expensive engine may be damaged or a safety hazard may occur, the simulator which
virtually generates the same signals with the actual engine is essential [1]. The virtual
Academic Editor: Erinc Erdem
engine simulator which replaces the actual engine should be able to provide the simulation
of engine operation in real time at almost the same level as the actual engine operation.
Received: 22 March 2021
Accepted: 21 May 2021
Therefore, the simulation speed should be as fast as the speed of the actual system to carry
Published: 3 June 2021
out input, calculation and output within the time range specified by the user. The develop-
ment of a real-time engine model which can carry out calculation at almost real time and
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
appropriate hardware is necessary for real-time simulation.
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
Many studies of electronic engine control systems of gas turbine engines have been
published maps and institutional affil- conducted. Among the previous studies, W.J. Davies et al. performed F-14 aircraft and
iations. propulsion control integration evaluation. Their paper presented the FADEC/F-14 inte-
gration evaluation performed by PWA and discussed the benefits of the FADEC/F-14
integrated system [2]. H. Yamane et al. carried out an investigation on aspects of aircraft
engine control systems. In their work, various electronic control systems for aircraft en-
gines were proposed [3]. F. Schwamm conducted research on FADEC computer systems
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
for safety-critical applications. In Schwamm’s work, the trends in FADEC development
This article is an open access article
were investigated [4]. K. Hjelmgren et al. performed a study on the reliability analysis of
distributed under the terms and single-engine aircraft FADEC. Their paper presented a reliability analysis of two options to
conditions of the Creative Commons fault-tolerant FADEC intended for control of an aircraft gas turbine engine [5]. K. Ito et al.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// performed a study on the optimal self-diagnosis policy for FADEC of gas turbine engines.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ In their paper, FADEC is self-diagnosed at the nth control calculations. Numerical examples
4.0/). were finally provided [6]. Ding Shuiting et al. conducted a study on the FHA (functional

Aerospace 2021, 8, 158. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060158 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/aerospace

Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 2 of 18

hazard assessment) method for the VBV (variable bleed valve) position control function of a
FADEC system based on an aero engine dynamic model [7]. G.I. Pogorelov et al. carried out
research on application of neural network technology and high-performance computing
for identification and real-time hardware-in-the-loop simulation of gas turbine engines [8].
Keeyoung Choi et al. performed a study on the development of an integrated high-fidelity
helicopter and engine simulation for control system design [9]. Kang-Yi Lee et al. carried
out a study on the certification of electronic engine controls [10]. Joo-Hyun Jung et al.
conducted a study on the T-50 engine airstart test. Their paper presented the results of
airstart tests performed to verify the T-50 airstart capability for various flight conditions [11].
F. Lu et al. performed research on rotating detonation wave propulsion about experimental
challenges, modeling, and engine concepts [12]. S. Jafari et al. conducted a study on
meta-heuristic global optimization algorithms for aircraft engine modeling and controller
design [13]. S. Jafari et al. conducted a study on modeling and control of the starter motor
and startup phase for gas turbines [14]. M. Montazeri-Gh et al. performed research on
bond graph modeling of a jet engine with an electric starter [15]. A. Imani et al. studied the
research on multi-loop switching controllers for aircraft gas turbine engines with stability
proof [16]. Salehi. A. et al. conducted a study on hardware-in-the-loop simulation of
a fuel control actuator of a turboshaft gas turbine engine [17]. M. Montazeri-Gh et al.
analyzed different numerical linearization methods for the dynamic model of a turbofan
engine [18]. M. Song et al. conducted research on optimization for the starting process of a
turbofan engine under a high-altitude environment [19]. J. Bai et al. carried out a study
on a nonlinear single controller of the DGEN380 aero engine design [20]. Y. Qian et al.
conducted a study on LPV/PI control for a nonlinear aero engine system based on guardian
maps theory [21]. I. Yazar et al. carried out research on a simulation-based dynamic model
and speed controller design of a small-scale turbojet engine [22]. K. Beneda developed
modular FADEC for a small-scale turbojet engine [23]. J. Lutambo conducted a study
on aircraft turbine engine control system development [24]. Bai Jie carried out research
on controller design for a small aero engine [25]. S. Victor et al. performed a study on
robust control system design of a turbofan [26]. J. W. Connolly et al. conducted research on
propulsion control modeling for a small turbofan engine [27]. Joseph. W. et al. carried out
a study on advanced control considerations for turbofan engine design [28]. J. Csank et al.
performed a study on a model-based engine control architecture with an extended Kalman
filter [29]. R. Andoga conducted a study on intelligent situational control of small turbojet
engines [30].
After many years of study, various theories of electronic engine control systems for gas
turbine engines have been proposed. Even though various engine control design theories
have been proposed, little research work on the development of experimental equipment
for electronic engine control systems has been conducted.
In this study, our research group developed a real-time engine model which was
essential for the development of the EECU, a core device in the aircraft engine, and the
test bench which embedded the real-time engine model on the real-time simulator and
generated the same physical signal with the sensor signal from the actual engine. The test
bench’s function test and the test bench’s interface and interworking test were performed.
Additionally, then, the real-time startup phase engine model verification test, real-time
normal operation phase engine model verification test and target EECU performance
verification test were carried out using the developed test bench. Finally, the test results
were analyzed.

2. Engine Model
2.1. Target Engine
The target engine for the EECU to be developed is a small turbofan engine which is
a two-spool and non-mixing type. The general specifications of the target engine are as
shown in Table 1. The target engine is a DGEN 380 turbofan engine. Figure 1 shows the
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 3 of 18

configuration of the target engine. Figure 2 shows the configuration and station numbers
employed for a two-spool turbofan engine.

Table 1. Specification of target engine.

Aerospace
Aerospace2021, 8, 8,
2021, x FOR PEER
x FOR REVIEW
PEER REVIEW Specification Value 3 3ofof1818
Maximum take-off thrust (TOP, ISA, SL, MN0) 2500 N
Specific fuel consumption (SFC TOP) 0.0438 kg/N/h
Maximum cruise thrust (MCR, ISA, SL, MN0.338) 1170 N
shown
shownininTable
Table1.1.The
Thetarget
targetengine
engineisisa aDGEN
DGEN380380turbofan
turbofanengine.
engine.Figure
Figure1 1shows
showsthe
the
Specific fuel consumption (SFC MCR) 7.58
configuration
configurationofofthe target
the targetengine.
engine.Figure
Figure
Weight (without nacelle) 2 shows
2 showsthe configuration
the configurationand
andstation numbers
station
80 kg numbers
employed
employedfor
fora atwo-spool
two-spoolturbofan
turbofanengine.
engine.

Figure
Figure1.1.1.DGEN
Figure DGEN380
DGEN 380turbofan
380 turbofanengine
turbofan engine(Price
engine (PriceInduction
(Price Induction
Induction ,©,Anglet,
©©
Anglet,France).
,Anglet, France).
France).

Figure
Figure2.2.Station
Stationnumbering
numberingfor
forthe
thetarget
targetengine.
engine.
Figure 2. Station numbering for the target engine.

Table
Table
2.2. 1.1.Specification
Specification
Real-Time ofofPhase
Startup target engine.
targetEngine
engine.Modeling
In this study, a real-time heat flow transient performance model
Specification
Specification was developed.
Value
Value
The heat flow
Maximum model
Maximumtake-off is the most
take-offthrust accurate
thrust(TOP, model
(TOP,ISA,
ISA,SL, of the
SL,MN0)
MN0) real-time engine models.
2500
2500NNThis method
does not require iteration. Therefore, it is a real-time engine model most commonly used
Specific
Specificfuel
fuelconsumption
consumption(SFC (SFCTOP)
TOP) 0.0438
0.0438kg/N/h
kg/N/h
for engine control system hardware development. In this work, a model was developed by
Maximum
Maximumcruise
cruisethrust
thrust(MCR,
(MCR,ISA,ISA,SL,
SL,MN0.338)
MN0.338) 1170
1170NN
applying the following equation [31]:
Specific
Specificfuel
fuelconsumption
consumption(SFC (SFCMCR)
MCR) 7.58
7.58
Weight
Weight(without
(without nacelle)
dρ4 nacelle)
(W3 − W4 + WF ) 8080kgkg
= (1)
dt v
2.2.
2.2.Real-Time
Real-TimeStartup
StartupPhase
PhaseEngine
EngineModeling
Modeling
InInthis
thisstudy,
study,a areal-time
real-timeheat
heatflow
flowtransient
transientperformance
performancemodel
modelwaswasdeveloped.
developed.The
The
heat
heatflow
flowmodel
modelisisthe themost
mostaccurate
accuratemodel
modelofofthe thereal-time
real-timeengine
enginemodels.
models.This
Thismethod
method
does
doesnotnotrequire
requireiteration.
iteration.Therefore,
Therefore,ititisisa areal-time
real-timeengine
enginemodel
modelmost
mostcommonly
commonlyused
used
for
forengine
enginecontrol
controlsystem
systemhardware
hardwaredevelopment.
development.InInthis thiswork,
work,a amodel
modelwas
wasdeveloped
developed
bybyapplying
applyingthe thefollowing
followingequation
equation[31]:
[31]:
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 4 of 18

dρ
where dt4 is the change rate of the density at the combustor outlet, and v is volume of
the combustor.
dT4 CP3 × T3 × W3 − CP4 × T4 × W4 + WF × LHV )
= dρ
(2)
dt CV × T4 × v × dt

where LHV is the fuel calorific value. Equation (2) is the change rate of the temperature at
the combustor outlet.
1
γ−1 (Win − Wout )
 
γ −1
P4 = 1+ × M2 ×R×T× (3)
2 v
 √ 2
T31
DPcold = Kcold × P31 × W31 × (4)
P31
where DPcold is the cold loss of the combustor, Kcold is the cold loss value and M is the
Mach number of the turbine inlet.
   √ 2
T4 T31
DPhot = Khot × P31 × − 1 × W31 × (5)
T31 P31

where DPhot is the heat loss of the combustor, and Khot is the heat loss value.

P
W = Q× √ (6)
T
1
T4 − T5 = T4 × η4 × (1 − γ −1
) (7)
γ
PR4.5
P1 − P0 P − Pamb
= 100 × (1 − RRF ) × 0 (8)
P0 P0
where RRF is the ram recovery coefficient.
γ −1
PR2.3γ − 1
T3 − T2 = T2 × (9)
η2
1
γ−1 Win − Wout
 
dP γ −1
= 1+ × M2 ×R×T× (10)
dt 2 v
where dP
dt is the pressure change rate of the volume. A real-time transfer function transient
performance model was considered by the following equation:
! ! !
dt
TClead TClead TClag
NL(t) = WF (t) × 1− + 1− × [ NL(t − 1) + ( NL(t) − WF (t − 1) × (1 − e ] (11)
TClag TClag

where NL(t) is the number of revolutions of the low-pressure turbine at time t. A real-
time lumped parameter transient performance model was considered by the following
equation. The partial derivative of the state variable is obtained from all other parameters.
∂NL ∂NLdot ∂NLdot ∂NLdot
= × ( NL − NLb ) + × ( NH − NHb ) + × (WF − WFb ) (12)
∂t ∂NL ∂NH ∂WF
where b is the operating point.
The modeling of the real-time startup phase engine model in the form of a lookup
table based on time was carried out through the reconfiguration of startup phase test data
measured from the target engine EECU, as shown in Figure 3. The real-time startup phase
engine model was composed of a “Master Switch” module which played the role to start
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 5 of 18

the engine, a “Startup Real Test” module which provided startup phase data for 0~109 s
in
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW the lookup table and an “Engine Simulator” module which generated a physical 5signal of 18
by converting all output signals into analog and discrete signals. Additionally, a “switch
model” was added to simulate the short circuit test by assigning a switch to all signals
separately and
separately and turning
turning on
on or
or off
off aa certain
certain signal
signal during
during the
the simulation.
simulation. SIMULINK was
SIMULINK was
used, as
used, as shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 3.
3. In
In order
order toto load
load the
the modeled
modeled real-time startup phase
real-time startup phase engine
engine
model on the engine simulator, SIMULINK
model on the engine simulator, SIMULINK was used. was used.

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Real-time
Real-time engine
engine model
model of
of startup
startup phase.
phase.

3.
3. Test
Test Bench
Bench Development
Development
In this study, thetest
In this study, the testbench
bench (TB)
(TB) waswas configured
configured for purpose
for the the purpose of verifying
of verifying the
the target
target EECU by loading the real-time engine model. The test bench
EECU by loading the real-time engine model. The test bench was configured to satisfy thewas configured to
satisfy the requirements
requirements to enable
to enable the the integrated
integrated performance performance test of EECU.
test of the target the target
TheEECU. The
test bench
test benchthe
provided provided thefor
interface interface
installingforand
installing and the
operating operating the target
target EECU EECU
as well as well
as the as
virtual
the virtual
engine engine
which which
could couldfault
simulate simulate
signalfault signal
input and input andinput
the same the same
and input
outputand output
signals as
signals
the actualas the actual
engine enginethe
through through the dual channel.
dual channel.
The
The test
test bench
bench consists
consists of of aa hardware
hardware unitunit (HW)
(HW) including
including aa real-time
real-time engine
engine simu-
simu-
lator,
lator, a flight vehicle/cockpit
vehicle/cockpitsimulator,
simulator,aa software
software simulator,
simulator, a mapping
mapping box, cables and
connectors,
connectors, a power
power supply unit, a console
console and
and desk
desk and
and aa monitor
monitor andand operating
operating software
software
unit (SW).
unit (SW).
The hardware unit in the test bench consists of a “cockpit simulator” which handles
the operation and management of the test bench, management of the test database of the
test bench and target engine, management of the ARINC429 communication and data and
operation and management of the EHD module, a “real-time engine simulator” which is
embedded with the real-time engine model simulating the same performance as the actual
 engine and simulates engine and drive system signals in real time, “engine controls”
which play the role of the cockpit where hardwire signals are sent to the EECU directly
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 and various switches are operated to control the EECU through mechanical production 6 ofof18
a PLA lever which adjusts the engine thrust and a “software simulator” which carries out
the modeling of the real-time engine embedded in the engine simulator or plays the role
of the host PC for the engine simulator and uploads software on the target EECU. HW
blockThe hardware
diagrams unit
of the inbench
test the test arebench
shown consists
in Figureof a4.“cockpit simulator” which handles
the operation and management
The test bench of the test
operation software wasbench, management
programmed using NI of the test database
LabVIEW, and it ofcon-the
test
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW bench and target engine, management of the ARINC429 communication
sists of a “TB Operation” program of the main GUI which operates and controls the whole and data
6 and
of 18
operation and management of the EHD module, a “real-time
test bench, an “EECU Monitoring” program which monitors and uses the target EECU engine simulator” which
is
andembedded withoutput
all input and the real-time engine model
signals through simulating
the ARINC429 the same performance
communication, an “EECU Test”as the
actual
engineengine
program which
and and cansimulates
simulates monitor
engineengine
andandsaveand drive
data
drive system
in the
system signals
verification
signals in real
in tests
real time,
such
time, “engine
as“engine
the target controls”
EECU
controls”
which play
performance the role
test, of
logic the
testcockpit
and where
startup hardwire
phase test andsignals
an are
“EHD”
which play the role of the cockpit where hardwire signals are sent to the EECU directlysent to
programthe EECU
which directly
creates
and
aand various
database
variousofswitches
data saved
switches are operated
areafter to
to control
the target
operated engine
control the EECU
thetest through
offline
EECU mechanical
and carries
through production
out state
mechanical diagnosis,
production of
of
atrend
PLA lever which
monitoring adjusts
and the
maintenanceengine thrust
phase and a
management.“softwareSW simulator”
block
a PLA lever which adjusts the engine thrust and a “software simulator” which carries out which
diagrams carries
of the out
test
the
themodeling
bench ofofthe
are shown
modeling inreal-time
the Figure 5,
real-time engine
and the
engine embedded
detailedinin
embedded the
theengine
enginesimulator
specifications ororplays
of the developed
simulator playstheTBrole
the areof
role
the
shownhost PC for
in Table
of the host PC 2.the engine
forThe simulator
theconceptual and uploads
diagramand
engine simulator of the software
developed
uploads on the target
TB isonshown
software EECU. HW
in Figures
the target EECU. block
6 and
HW
diagrams of the test
7.block diagrams of thebench are shown
test bench in Figure
are shown 4.
in Figure 4.
The test bench operation software was programmed using NI LabVIEW, and it con-
sists of a “TB Operation” program of the main GUI which operates and controls the whole
test bench, an “EECU Monitoring” program which monitors and uses the target EECU
and all input and output signals through the ARINC429 communication, an “EECU Test”
program which can monitor and save data in the verification tests such as the target EECU
performance test, logic test and startup phase test and an “EHD” program which creates
a database of data saved after the target engine test offline and carries out state diagnosis,
trend monitoring and maintenance phase management. SW block diagrams of the test
bench are shown in Figure 5, and the detailed specifications of the developed TB are
shown in Table 2. The conceptual diagram of the developed TB is shown in Figures 6 and
7.

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Structure
Structure of
of test
test bench
bench hardware.
hardware.

The test bench operation software was programmed using NI LabVIEW, and it consists
of a “TB Operation” program of the main GUI which operates and controls the whole
test bench, an “EECU Monitoring” program which monitors and uses the target EECU
and all input and output signals through the ARINC429 communication, an “EECU Test”
program which can monitor and save data in the verification tests such as the target EECU
performance test, logic test and startup phase test and an “EHD” program which creates a
database of data saved after the target engine test offline and carries out state diagnosis,
trend monitoring and maintenance phase management. SW block diagrams of the test
bench are shown in Figure 5, and the detailed specifications of the developed TB are shown
inFigure
Table4.2.Structure
The conceptual diagram
of test bench of the developed TB is shown in Figures 6 and 7.
hardware.

Figure 5. Structure of test bench operational SW.

Figure5.5.Structure
Figure Structureof
oftest
testbench
bench operational
operational SW.
SW.
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 7 of 18

Table 2. Required specification of test bench.

Classify Specification
Temperature Sensor RTD (8 Ch), Thermocouple (6 Ch), PTC (2 Ch)
Pressure Sensor 12 Ch
Glowplug Current 2 Ch
Output RPM Sensor 4 Ch
Engine Simulator PLA Sensor 2 Ch
Frequency 6 Ch
Discrete 14 Ch
Discrete 12 Ch
Input
PWM 6 Ch
Communication ARINC429 (2 Ch), RS232 (2 Ch), Ethernet (2 Ch)

Cockpit Simulator PLA Sensor 2 Ch

Output
Discrete 22 Ch
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 18
Input
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW Discrete 22 Ch 7 of 18

Figure6.6.Conceptual
Figure Conceptualdiagram
diagramofofdeveloped
developedtest
testbench.
bench.
Figure 6. Conceptual diagram of developed test bench.

Figure 7. Test bench integration.

Figure7.7.Test
Figure Testbench
benchintegration.
integration.
Table 2. Required specification of test bench.
Table 2. Required specification of test bench.
Classify Specification
Classify Specification
Temperature Sensor RTD (8 Ch), Thermocouple (6 Ch), PTC (2 Ch)
Temperature Sensor RTD (8 Ch), Thermocouple (6 Ch), PTC (2 Ch)
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 8 of 18

4. EECU Verification Test

4.1. Functional Test of Test Bench
The manufactured test bench is shown in Figure 7. The state of the test bench was
inspected through the functional test after integrating the test bench. For the functional
test of the test bench, the inspection cable was connected to each pin at the end of the cable
directly connected to the target EECU. The test items, standards and methods for the signals
in all items of channels A and B were summarized as shown in Table 3. Three measurements
were carried out for each test item, and if all measurement values were within the error
range, an “OK” judgment was given.

Table 3. Result of test bench functional test (discrete output_CH_A).

Measurement (Case No.)

No. Test Items Standard Method Reference Decision
X1 X2 X3

Master (0/5 V, 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.698 0.699 0.698

1 OK
FS ± 10%) 2.6 V < X < 5 V (OFF) 4.05 4.05 4.05
IGN 0V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.702 0.703 0.701
2 DCRANK 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.684 0.684 0.684 OK
WCRANK 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.696 0.696 0.696
2.6 V < X < 5 V
IGN 4.8 4.8 4.8
(OFF)

CH. 2.6 V < X < 5 V

3 Normal DCRANK 4.8 4.8 4.8 OK
A Discrete Digital (OFF)
Output Multimeter
2.6 V < X < 5 V
WCRANK 4.8 4.8 4.8
(OFF)

WOW (0/5 V, 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.704 0.704 0.704

4 OK
FS ± 10%) 2.6 V < X < 5 V (OFF) 4.8 4.8 4.8
CH_A 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.7 0.7 0.7
5 CH_AUTO 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.692 0.692 0.692 OK
CH_B 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.690 0.690 0.690

OFCsts (0/5 V, 0 V < X < 2.6 V (ON) 0.142 0.141 0.141

6 OK
FS ± 10%) 2.6 V < X < 5 V (OFF) 4.21 4.22 4.22

The result of the functional test is as shown in Table 4, and the measurement values for
all test items in channels A and B are within the error range; therefore, it can be regarded
that the functional reliability of the test bench for the verification test of the target EECU
has been secured.

Table 4. Result of test bench functional test.

Test Result
No. Test Items
Ch. A Ch. B
1 MASTER OK OK
2 IGN OK OK
3 DCRANK OK OK
4 WCRANK OK OK
5 NORMAL OK OK
6 WOW OK OK
7 CH_A OK OK
8 Discrete Output CH_AUTO OK OK
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 9 of 18

Table 4. Cont.

Test Result
No. Test Items
Ch. A Ch. B
9 CH_B OK OK
10 OFCsts OK OK
11 FFCsts OK OK
12 OLLsts OK OK
13 FMVsts OK OK
14 FSVsts OK OK
15 OSOVsts OK OK
16 GPcmd OK OK
17 FMVcmd OK OK
18 FSVcmd OK OK
Discrete Input
19 OSOVcmd OK OK
20 SGstart OK OK
21 SGmode OK OK
22 PS3 OK OK
23 P0 OK OK
24 PFuel OK OK
25 POil OK OK
26 T6 OK OK
27 T0 OK OK
28 TFuel OK OK
29 TOil OK OK
Analog Output
30 TSG OK OK
31 GPcur OK OK
32 PLA OK OK
33 NH OK OK
34 NL OK OK
35 FPMspd OK OK
36 OPMspd OK OK
37 SGspd OK OK
38 FPMcmd OK OK
39 Analog Input OPMcmd OK OK
40 SGcmd OK OK

4.2. EECU Interface and Interworking Test

The interface and interworking test between the test bench and target EECU is the
test to check if the data transmission and reception between the test bench and target
EECU through the ARINC429 communication are carried out smoothly after connecting
the test bench and EECU with a cable and operating the test bench operating program.
The interface and interworking test was carried out in the process as shown in Figure 8.
At this time, a separate interface test engine model was embedded in the engine
simulator, and the test items, standards and methods for the signals in all items of channels
A and B were summarized as shown in Table 5 in a similar way to the functional test.
Three measurements were carried out for each test item, and if all measurement values
were within the error range, an “OK” judgment was given.
The result of the interface and interworking test between the test bench and target
EECU is as shown in Table 6, where it is confirmed that all test items in channels A and B
were within the error range. Therefore, it can be regarded that the functional reliability for
data signals through the communication between the test bench and target EECU has been
secured for the following verification test of the target EECU.
 4.2. EECU Interface and Interworking Test
The interface and interworking test between the test bench and target EECU is the
test to check if the data transmission and reception between the test bench and target
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 EECU through the ARINC429 communication are carried out smoothly after connecting 10 of 18
the test bench and EECU with a cable and operating the test bench operating program.
The interface and interworking test was carried out in the process as shown in Figure 8.

Figure
Figure 8.
8. Process
Process of
of interface
interface test.
test.

Table 5. Result of interface and interworking test (discrete output_CH_A).

No. Test Items Standard Method Reference Measurement (Case No.) Decision

Master MASTER ON ON ON ON
1 OK
(ON/OFF) Switch OFF OFF OFF OFF
IGN (ON) IGN IGN IGN IGN
DCRANK
MODE DCRANK DCRANK DCRANK DCRANK
2 (ON) OK
Switch
WCRANK
WCRANK WCRANK WCRANK WCRANK
(ON)
3 NOMAL (ON) NOMAL NOMAL NOMAL NOMAL OK

WOW WOW Ground Ground Ground Ground

4 OK
(ON/OFF) Switch Flight Flight Flight Flight
CH_A CH_A CH_A CH_A CH_A
CH_AUTO Channel CH_AUTO CH_AUTO CH_AUTO CH_AUTO
5 CH. OK
Switch
A Discrete CH_B CH_B CH_B CH_B CH_B
Output
Engine Discrete, 0 Clogged Clogged Clogged
6 OFCsts (0/5 V) OK
Simulator Discrete, 1 Not Clogged Not Clogged Not Clogged

Engine Discrete, 0 Clogged Clogged Clogged

7 FFCsts (0/5 V) OK
Simulator Discrete, 1 Not Clogged Not Clogged Not Clogged

Engine Discrete, 0 Low Oil Low Oil Low Oil

8 OLLsts (0/5 V) OK
Simulator Discrete, 1 Enough Oil Enough Oil Enough Oil

FMVsts Engine Discrete, 0 Open Open Open

9 OK
(0/5 V) Simulator Discrete, 1 Closed Closed Closed

Engine Discrete, 0 Open Open Open

10 FSVsts (0/5 V) OK
Simulator Discrete, 1 Closed Closed Closed

OSOVsts Engine Discrete, 0 Open Open Open

11 Simulator OK
(0/5 V) Discrete, 1 Closed Closed Closed
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 11 of 18

Table 6. Result of EECU test bench interface test.

Test Result
No. Test Items
Ch. A Ch. B
1 MASTER OK OK
2 IGN OK OK
3 DCRANK OK OK
4 WCRANK OK OK
5 NORMAL OK OK
6 WOW OK OK
7 CH_A OK OK
8 Discrete Output CH_AUTO OK OK
9 CH_B OK OK
10 OFCsts OK OK
11 FFCsts OK OK
12 OLLsts OK OK
13 FMVsts OK OK
14 FSVsts OK OK
15 OSOVsts OK OK
16 GPcmd OK OK
17 FMVcmd OK OK
18 FSVcmd OK OK
Discrete Input
19 OSOVcmd OK OK
20 SGstart OK OK
21 SGmode OK OK
22 PS3 OK OK
23 P0 OK OK
24 PFuel OK OK
25 POil OK OK
26 T6 OK OK
27 T0 OK OK
28 TFuel OK OK
29 TOil OK OK
Analog Output
30 TSG OK OK
31 GPcur OK OK
32 PLA OK OK
33 NH OK OK
34 NL OK OK
35 FPMspd OK OK
36 OPMspd OK OK
37 SGspd OK OK
38 FPMcmd OK OK
39 Analog Input OPMcmd OK OK
40 SGcmd OK OK
 36 OPMspd OK OK
36 OPMspd OK OK
37 SGspd OK OK
37 SGspd OK OK
38 FPMcmd OK OK
Aerospace 2021,38
398, 158 Analog Input
FPMcmd
OPMcmd
OK
OK
OK
OK 12 of 18
39 Analog Input OPMcmd OK OK
40 SGcmd OK OK
40 SGcmd OK OK

4.3. Real-Time
4.3. Real-Time EngineModel Model Verification Test
4.3. Real-TimeEngine
Engine ModelVerification
Verification Test
Test
Theinterworking
The interworkingtest testwith
withthethetarget
targetEECU
EECU was
was carried
carried outout
by by loading
loading thethe startup
startup
The interworking test with the target EECU was carried out by loading the startup
phase
phase real-time engine model established from data obtained through trial operation
of the of
phasereal-time
real-timeengine
enginemodel
modelestablished
establishedfrom datadata
from obtained through
obtained trial operation
through trial operation of
the target
target engine
engine on theonengine
the engine simulator.
simulator.
the target engine on the engine simulator.
ItItwas
wasconfirmed
confirmedfromfromthe theNH,
NH,NL, NL, T6T6andand FMVsts
FMVsts result
result onon thethe startup
startup phasephase
thatthat
It was confirmed from the NH, NL, T6 and FMVsts result on the startup phase that
thetest
the testdata
datamatched
matched well
well within
within 1%1% in the
in the whole
whole startup
startup phase,
phase, as shown
as shown in Figures
in Figures 9–11, 9–
the test data matched well within 1% in the whole startup phase, as shown in Figures 9–
11, and
and data data
were were
savedsaved in atime
in a fixed fixed time interval
interval (0.02s). Therefore,
(0.02 s). Therefore, it was confirmed
it was confirmed that analogthat
11, and data were saved in a fixed time interval (0.02s). Therefore, it was confirmed that
sensor
analogoutput
sensor signals
output and discrete
signals output signals
and discrete output of the actual
signals of theengine
actual were
engine monitored
were moni-
analog sensor output signals and discrete output signals of the actual engine were moni-
in the engine
tored in the simulator embeddedembedded
engine simulator in the real-time
in theengine modelengine
real-time through the ARINC429
model through the
tored in the engine
communication, and thesimulator
signals embedded
were inpermissible
the real-time engine
range ofmodel through the
ARINC429 communication, and thewithin
signalsthewere within theerror
permissible the target
error EECU.
range of the
ARINC429
Ittarget
was verified communication,
that this and
model that
couldthe signals
be model were
used ascould within
the startup the permissible
phase real-time error range of the
EECU. It was verified this be used as the startupengine
phase model
real-time
target
for the EECU. It
startup was performance
phase verified that verification
this model of could
the be used
target as the startup phase real-time
EECU.
engine model for the startup phase performance verification of the target EECU.
engine model for the startup phase performance verification of the target EECU.

Figure9.9.Result
Result of startupphase
phase performance test (NH).
Figure 9. Resultofofstartup
Figure startup phaseperformance
performancetest (NH).
test (NH).

Figure 10. Result of startup phase performance test (NL).

Figure10.
Figure 10.Result
Resultofofstartup
startupphase
phaseperformance
performance test
test (NL).
(NL).
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 13 of 18
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 18

Figure11.
Figure 11.Result
Resultofofstartup
startupphase
phaseperformance
performancetest
test(T6).
(T6).

4.4.
4.4.Startup
StartupPhase
PhaseControl
ControlLogic
LogicVerification
VerificationTest
Test
EECU
EECUsoftware
softwareconsists
consistsofofaacontrol
controllogic,
logic,application
applicationsoftware
softwareand andaareal-time
real-timeoper-
oper-
ating
atingsystem.
system.Here,
Here,the
thecontrol
controllogic
logichandles
handlesthe theengine
enginespeed
speedcontrol,
control,sequence
sequencecontrol,
control,
engine
enginestate
statemonitoring
monitoring andandengine
engineprotection
protection functions. It isItthe
functions. is most important
the most part in
important partthein
development
the development of EECU software.
of EECU The application
software. The applicationsoftware handles
software the system
handles communica-
the system commu-
tion interface
nication and dual
interface andchannel management,
dual channel and the real-time
management, operating operating
and the real-time system manages
system
the tasks of the application program to be carried out in a consistent
manages the tasks of the application program to be carried out in a consistent and appointedand time.ap-
The verification
pointed time. test of the control logic which performed the most important role
in the The
EECU software test
verification was ofcarried out using
the control logicthe test bench
which performeddeveloped
the mostthrough this study.
important role in
Currently,
the EECUthe target was
software EECU is being
carried out developed
using the test in the country.
bench developed Therefore,
through thethis
teststudy.
was
carried out for the control logic of the startup phase which was developed
Currently, the target EECU is being developed in the country. Therefore, the test was car- up to date.
When thefor
ried out target
the EECU
controlislogic
developed completely
of the startup phase in which
the future,
was the control logic
developed up totest will
date. Whenbe
carried out for the whole operation phase of the target engine. The startup
the target EECU is developed completely in the future, the control logic test will be carried phase control
logic testthe
out for was carried
whole out in the
operation process
phase of theastarget
shown in Figure
engine. The12. startup phase control logic test
The EECU delivers FPMcmd, FMVcmd
was carried out in the process as shown in Figure 12. and FSVcmd output values according to the
controlThelogic
EECUcalculation
deliversresult to the engine
FPMcmd, FMVcmd in the
andstartup
FSVcmd phase, as shown
output valuesinaccording
Figures 13–15,
to the
and the engine receives the input of this command. The result
control logic calculation result to the engine in the startup phase, as shown in shows that the control logic
Figures 13–
in15,
the early
and thestage
engineof receives
development shows
the input a significant
of this command. difference
The result from the reference
shows data.
that the control
Therefore, the reasons for the error occurrence from the control log were analyzed, and the
logic in the early stage of development shows a significant difference from the reference
control logic was modified accordingly. The test was carried out again until the final control
data. Therefore, the reasons for the error occurrence from the control log were analyzed,
logic test result almost matched with the target data.
and the control logic was modified accordingly. The test was carried out again until the
final control logic test result almost matched with the target data.
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 14 of 18
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18
Aerospace 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18

Figure 12. Process of control logic performance test.

Figure 12.Process
Figure12. Processofofcontrol
controllogic
logicperformance
performancetest.
test.

Figure 13. Result of EECU control logic verification test (FPMcmd).

Figure 13.Result
Figure13. ResultofofEECU
EECUcontrol
controllogic
logicverification
verificationtest
test(FPMcmd).
(FPMcmd).
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 15 of 18
Aerospace2021,
Aerospace 2021,8,8,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 15 of
15 of 18
18

Figure
Figure 14.Result
Figure14.
14.
of
Resultof
Result
EECU
ofEECU control
EECUcontrol logic
controllogic verification
logicverification test
verificationtest (FMVcmd).
test(FMVcmd).
(FMVcmd).

Figure
Figure 15.Result
Figure15.
15. of
Resultof
Result EECU
ofEECU control
EECUcontrol logic
controllogic verification
logicverification test
verificationtest (FSVcmd).
test(FSVcmd).
(FSVcmd).
5. Conclusions
5.5.Conclusions
Conclusions
A test bench for the performance test of an EECU was developed, and the test was
AA test
test bench
bench for the the performance
performance testtest of anan EECU
EECU waswas developed, and and thethe test
test was
was
carried out. The for test bench’s functional of test, test bench’sdeveloped,
interface and interworking
carried out.
carried out. The
The test
test bench’s
bench’s functional
functional test,
test,test
test bench’s
bench’s interface
interfaceand
and interworking
interworking test, test,
test, real-time startup phase engine model verification test and target EECU performance
real-timestartup
real-time startupphase
phaseengine
enginemodel
modelverification
verificationtesttestand
andtarget
targetEECU
EECUperformance
performancever- ver-
verification test were carried out using the configured test bench, and the test results
ification
ification test were carried out using the configured test bench, and the test
test were carried out using the configured test bench, and the test results were results were
were analyzed.
analyzed.
analyzed.
As the result of the TB functional test, the measurement values for all test items in
As the
As the result
result of
of the
the TB
TB functional test,
test, the measurement
measurement values
values for
for all
all test
test items
items inin
channels A and B were withinfunctional
the error range;the therefore, the functional reliability of the test
channels A
channels A and
and BB were
were within the the error range;
range; therefore,
therefore, the
the functional reliability
reliability of of the
the
bench for the verificationwithin
test of theerror
target EECU was secured.functional
As a result of the interface
and interworking test between the test bench and target EECU, it was confirmed that
all test items in channels A and B were within the error range. Therefore, the functional
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 16 of 18

reliability for data signals through the communication between the test bench and target
EECU was secured for the verification test of the target EECU.
As a result of the startup phase verification test after the verification of the test bench,
it was confirmed that analog sensor output signals and discrete output signals of the actual
engine were monitored and saved accurately in a 0.02 s interval in the engine simulator
embedded in the real-time engine model through the ARINC communication, and the
signals were within the permissible error range of the target EECU. Therefore, it was
confirmed that this model could be used as the startup phase real-time engine model for
the startup phase performance verification of the target EECU. Additionally, as a result of
the control logic test, the control logic in the early stage of development showed a significant
difference from the reference data. Therefore, the reasons for the error occurrence from
the control log were analyzed, and the control logic was modified accordingly. The test
was carried out again until the final control logic test result almost matched with the target
data. Currently, the target EECU is being developed in the country. Therefore, the test
was carried out for the control logic of the startup phase which was developed up to date.
When the target EECU is developed completely in the future, the control logic test will be
carried out for the whole operation phase of the target engine.

Author Contributions: S.K., conceptualization, software, validation, writing—original draft prepara-

tion; H.P., writing—review and editing, work guidance. Both authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Korea Aerospace Technology Research Association
(Project No. 10043602, Development of the EECU platform aircraft for gas turbine engine FADEC) as
part of the aerospace parts & technology development project supported by the Ministry of Trade,
Industry and Energy, which is graciously acknowledged. This research was funded by the Howon
University research fund. This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program
through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education
(No. 2018R1D1A1B07043553). This research was supported by the Korea Institute for Advancement
of Technology (KIAT) grant funded by the Korean government (MOTIE) (P0012769, The Competency
Development Program for Industry Specialist).
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on reasonable request
from the corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Changduk Kong.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

EECU electronic engine control unit

ρ density
t time
ν volume
LHV fuel calorific value
DPcold cold loss of combustor
DPhot heat loss of combustor
Kcold cold loss value
Khot heat loss value
RRF ram recovery coefficient
RTD resistance temperature diode
PTC positive temperature coefficient thermistor
EHD engine health diagnostic
GUI graphical user interface
EECU electronic engine control units
P pressure
NL (t) the number of revolutions of low pressure at time t
B operating point
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 17 of 18

References
1. Lobo, L.M.; Dufour, C.; Mahseredjian, J. Real-time simulation of more-electric aircraft power sytems. In Proceedings of the EPE’13
ECCE Europe Conference, Lille, France, 3–5 September 2013; pp. 1–10.
2. Davies, W.J.; Hoelzer, C.A.; Vizzini, R.W. F-14 aircraft and propulsion control integration evaluation. J. Eng. Power 1983, 105,
663–668. [CrossRef]
3. Yamane, H.; Takahara, Y.; Oyobe, T. Aspects of aircraft engine control systems R&D. Control Eng. Pract. 1997, 5, 595–602.
4. Schwamm, F. FADEC computer systems for safety critical application. In Proceedings of the ASME the 1998 International Gas
Turbine & Aeroengine Congress & Exhibition, Stockholm, Sweden, 2–5 June 1998; pp. 1–8.
5. Hjelmgren, K.; Svensson, S.; Hannius, O. Reliability analysis of a single-engine aircraft FADEC. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, Anaheim, CA, USA, 19–22 January 1998; pp. 401–407.
6. Ito, K.; Nakagawa, T. Optimal self-diagnosis policy for FADEC of gas turbine engines. Math. Comput. Model. 2003, 38, 1243–1248.
[CrossRef]
7. Ding, S.; Qiu, T.; Liu, X.; Zhang, S. FHA method for VBV position control function of FADEC system based on aero-engine
dynamic model. Procedia Eng. 2011, 17, 567–579.
8. Pogorelov, G.I.; Kulikov, G.G.; Abdulnagimov, A.I.; Badamshin, B.I. Application of neural network technology and high-
performance computing for identification and real-time hardware-in-the-loop simulation of gas turbine engines. Procedia Eng.
2017, 176, 402–408. [CrossRef]
9. Choi, K.; Jang, S.-A.; Choi, K.; Eom, J.S.; Lee, B.S.; Son, Y.C.; Ryu, H. Development of an integrated high fidelity helicopter and
engine simulation for control system design. J. Korean Soc. Aeronaut. Space Sci. 2010, 38, 249–257.
10. Lee, K.-Y.; Han, S.-H.; Jin, Y.-K.; Lee, S.-J.; Kim, K.-S. A study on certification of electronic engine controls. J. Korean Soc. Aeronaut.
Space Sci. 2005, 33, 104–109.
11. Jung, J.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Park, S.-W.; Jeong, I.-M.; Lee, S.-B. T-50 engine airstart test. J. Korean Soc. Aeronaut. Space Sci. 2006, 34,
90–95.
12. Lu, F.; Braun, E. Rotating detonation wave propulsion: Experimental challenges, modeling, and engine concepts. J. Propuls. Power
2014, 30, 1125–1142. [CrossRef]
13. Jafari, S.; Nikolaidis, T. Meta-heuristic global optimization algorithms for aircraft engines modelling and controller design;
a review, research challenges, and exploring the future. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2019, 104, 40–53. [CrossRef]
14. Jafari, S.; Fashandi, S.A.M.; Nikolaidis, T. Modeling and control of the starter motor and start-up phase for gas turbines. Electronics
2019, 8, 363. [CrossRef]
15. Montazeri-Gh, M.; Fashandi, S.A.M. Bond graph modeling of a jet engine with electric starter. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. G J. Aerosp.
Eng. 2019, 233, 3193–3210. [CrossRef]
16. Imani, A.; Montazeri-Gh, M. A multi-loop switching controller for aircraft gas turbine engine with stability proof. Int. J. Control
Autom. Syst. 2019, 17, 1359–1368. [CrossRef]
17. Salehi, A.; Montazeri-Gh, M. Hardware-in-the-loop simulation of fuel control actuator of a turboshaft gas turbine engine. Proc.
Inst. Mech. Eng. M 2019, 233, 969–977. [CrossRef]
18. Montazeri-Gh, M.; Rasti, A. Analyzing different numerical linearization methods for the dynamic model of a turbofan engine.
Mech. Ind. 2019, 20, 303. [CrossRef]
19. Song, M.; Jianguo, T.; Sanmai, S. Optimization for the starting process of turbofan engine under high-altitude environment. IEEE
Access 2018, 6, 55797–55806. [CrossRef]
20. Bai, J.; Liu, S.; Wei, W. The nonlinear single controller of DGEN380 aero engine design. Int. J. Aerosp. Eng. 2019, 7209428, 1–12.
[CrossRef]
21. Qian, Y.; Ye, Z.; Zhang, H. LPV/PI control for nonlinear aeroengine system based on guardian maps theory. IEEE Access 2019,
7, 125854–125867. [CrossRef]
22. Yazar, I.; Kiyak, E.; Caliskan, F. Simulation-based dynamic model and speed controller design of a small-scale turbojet engine.
Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 2018, 90, 351–358. [CrossRef]
23. Beneda, K. Development of a modular FADEC for small scale turbojet engine. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 14th International
Symposium on Applied Machine Intelligence and Informatics (SAMI), Herlany, Slovakia, 21–23 January 2016.
24. Lutambo, J.; Wang, J.; Yue, H. Aircraft turbine engine control systems development: Historical perspective. In Proceedings of the
2015 34th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Hangzhou, China, 28–30 July 2015.
25. Jie, B.; Shuai, L.; Wang, W. An integrated controller design for a small aero-engine. In Proceedings of the 2019 Chinese Control
and Decision Conference (CCDC), Nanchang, China, 3–5 June 2019.
26. Victor, S.; Taymans, A.; Melchior, P. Robust control system design of a turbofan. In Proceedings of the International Conference
on Fractional Differentiation and Its Applications, Novi Sad, Republic of Serbia, 18–20 July 2016.
27. Connolly, J.W.; Csank, J.; Chicatelli, A.; Franco, K. Propulsion controls modeling for a small turbofan engine. In Proceedings of
the 53rd AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, 10–12 July 2017.
28. Connolly, J.W.; Csank, J.; Chicatelli, A. Advanced control considerations for turbofan engine design. In Proceedings of the 52nd
AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 25–27 July 2016.
29. Csank, J.; Connolly, J.W. Model-based engine control architecture with an extended Kalman Filter. In Proceedings of AIAA
Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 4–8 January 2016.
Aerospace 2021, 8, 158 18 of 18

30. Andoga, R.; Fozo, L.; Judicak, J.; Breda, R.; Szabo, S.; Rozenberg, R.; Dzunda, M. Intelligent situational control of small turbojet
engines. Int. J. Aerosp. Eng. 2018, 8328762, 1–16. [CrossRef]
31. Walsh, P.P.; Fletcher, P. Gas. Turbine Performance, 2nd ed.; Blackwell Science: Oxford, UK, 2004; pp. 444–476.