文章快速检索 高级检索

EMI effect of pantograph catenary arc of high-speed railway on aircraft approach landing
LU Hede, ZHANG Qiang
College of Air Traffic Management, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan 618307, China
Abstract: To study the ElectroMagnetic Interference (EMI) effect of the pantograph catenary arc of high-speed railway on aircraft approach landing, this study tests the electromagnetic radiation intensity of the pantograph catenary arc in phase separation where the arc occurs frequently. According to the theory of radio wave propagation and GB 6364-2013 the relation between the received signal in the aircraft and the angle of passing through the airport, the position of the phase separation, and the landing height of the aircraft is obtained by numerical calculations. First, the Signal-to-Interference Ratio (SIR) of airborne received signals increases gradually with the increase of the angle of passing through the airport; then, the closer the phase separation is to the airport runway threshold, the smaller the SIR of the airborne signals is; finally, the SIR first decreases and then increases with the reduction of the approach landing height. The EMI effect of the pantograph catenary arc on the Instrument Landing System (ILS) is studied at the position where the aircraft is disturbed most when the high-speed railway passes through the airport runway center at 45°. The SIR of Localizer is 12.92 dB, smaller than the minimum protection rate, 20 dB, specified in the GB 6364-2013; the SIR of Glide Slope is 29.08 dB, meeting the requirement of the national standard; the SIR of Marker is 16.64 dB, which is smaller than the protection rate requirement, 23 dB, of the national standard. This paper presents theoretical basis and technical method for the study of electromagnetic compatibility between civil aviation and high-speed railway, providing support for airport location selection and high-speed railway line selection planning.
Keywords: high-speed railway    pantograph catenary arcs    EMI    phase separation    approach landing    instrument landing systems    SIR

1 机场无线电设备及防护率要求

ILS是目前国内外在机场终端区引导飞机精密进近着陆的主要着陆引导设备，俗称盲降系统。仪表着陆系统主要分为3个子系统：提供横向引导的航向信标系统、提供垂直引导的下滑信标系统和提供距离引导的指点信标系统组成，其相对位置关系如图 1所示，图中h为飞机飞行高度。

 图 1 仪表着陆系统相对位置关系示意图 Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of relative position of instrument landing system

 信标台 航向信标 下滑信标 指点信标 工作频率/MHz 108~111.95 329.15~335.0 75 防护率要求/dB 20 20 23
2 弓网离线电弧测试 2.1 测试地点选取

 图 2 电分相测试现场图 Fig. 2 Electrical phase separation test spot
2.2 测试参数设置

 设备名称 型号 技术指标 电磁干扰接收机 ESCI-3 9 kHz~3 GHz 天线 双锥天线HK116 20~300 MHz 对数周期天线HL223 300 MHz~2 GHz 同轴电缆 RG214 线长5 m
2.3 测试数据

 信标名称 频率/MHz 测试数据/(dBμV·m-1) PK QPK AV 航向信标 108.1 68.0 45.0 21.0 110.1 66.1 43.1 20.1 111.95 65.3 47.3 23.3 下滑信标 329.3 27.9 17.9 12.9 332 26.0 18.0 13.0 335 25.1 18.1 14.1 指点信标 75 64.4 42.4 29.4

 ${E_{10}} = {E_D} + n \times 20{\rm{lg}}\frac{D}{{10}}$ （1）

3 弓网电弧电磁干扰的影响

3.1 机载信号信干比的变化规律 3.1.1 铁路下穿角α对信干比的影响

 图 3 铁路下穿机场跑道示意图 Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of railway passing airport runway underground

 ${{D_{\rm{s}}} = \sqrt {{{(h{\rm{cot}}{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} \theta + 3{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} 600 + 300)}^2} + {h^2}} }$ （2）
 ${{D_{\rm{n}}} = \sqrt {{{(h{\rm{cot}}{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} \theta )}^2} + {{(1{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} 800{\rm{tan}}{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} \alpha )}^2} + {h^2}} }$ （3）

 ${S = \frac{{P{{10}^{G/10}}}}{{4\pi D_{\rm{s}}^2}}}$ （4）
 ${S = \frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{{E_{\rm{s}}^2}}{\eta }}$ （5）

 ${{S_{\rm{n}}} = \frac{{{P_{\rm{n}}}}}{{4\pi D_{\rm{n}}^2}}}$ （6）
 ${{S_{\rm{n}}} = \frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{{E_{\rm{n}}^2}}{\eta }}$ （7）

 $R = {E_{\rm{s}}} - {E_{\rm{n}}}$ （8）

 图 4 机载接收信号信干比与铁路下穿角的关系 Fig. 4 Relationship between signal-to-interference ratio of airborne received signals and railway under-passing angle

3.1.2 电分相位置x对信干比的影响

 图 5 铁路以45°下穿跑道示意图 Fig. 5 Schematic diagram of railway passing under runway at 45°

 ${D_{{\rm{n1}}}} = \sqrt {{{(h{\rm{cot}}{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} \theta - x)}^2} + {{(x + 1{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} 800)}^2} + {h^2}}$ （9）

 图 6 机载接收信号信干比随x的变化曲线 Fig. 6 Curve of signal-to-interference ratio of airborne received signals along with x
3.1.3 飞机着陆高度h对信干比的影响

 图 7 机载接收信号信干比随飞机着陆高度的变化曲线 Fig. 7 Curve of signal-to-interference ratio of airborne received signals along with aircraft landing height

3.2 弓网离线电弧对ILS各信标台信号的影响

3.2.1 弓网离线电弧对航向信标的影响

 ${E_{\rm{s}}} = 20{\rm{lg}}{E_{{\rm{min}}}} + 1.2 \times 20{\rm{lg}}\frac{{46{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} 300}}{{{D_{\rm{s}}}}}$ （10）

 ${E_{\rm{n}}} = 68.81 + 1.2 \times 20{\rm{lg}}\frac{{165}}{{\sqrt {1{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {{800}^2} + {{(h/{\rm{sin}}\theta )}^2}} }}$ （11）

3.2.2 弓网离线电弧对下滑信标的影响

 ${D_{{\rm{s1}}}} = \sqrt {{h^2} + {{(h{\rm{cot}}\theta + 300)}^2} + {{150}^2}}$ （12）

 ${E_{\rm{s}}} = 20{\rm{lg}}{E_{{\rm{min}}}} + 20{\rm{lg}}\frac{{18{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} 500}}{{{D_{{\rm{s1}}}}}}$ （13）

3.2.3 弓网离线电弧对指点信标的影响

 图 8 中指点信标台信号覆盖区域 Fig. 8 Signal coverage area of middle marker beacon

 ${{D_{{\rm{n1}}}} = \sqrt {1{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {{800}^2} + {{[(1{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} 200 - 200)/{\rm{cos}}{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} \theta ]}^2}} }$ （14）
 ${{E_{{\rm{n1}}}} = 68.81 + 1.2 \times 20{\rm{lg}}\frac{{165}}{{{D_{{\rm{n1}}}}}}}$ （15）

 ${R_1} = 20{\rm{lg}}{E_{{\rm{min}}}} - {E_{{\rm{n1}}}}$ （16）

4 结论

1) 当铁路以不同角度下穿机场跑道中心时，横穿角度越小机载信号的信干比越小，越容易受到电磁干扰影响。因此增大下穿角度有利于减小干扰影响。

2) 当铁路以某一固定角度下穿机场时，随着电分相到跑道距离增加干扰逐渐减小。

3) 当铁路以45°角下穿机场跑道中心，电分相位置与跑道入口平行时，随着飞机着陆高度不断降低，机载接收信号信干比先减小后增大，当飞机高度为43 m时，信干比最小，受到弓网电弧的电磁干扰最大。

4) 通过实测数据分析了弓网离线电弧电磁辐射对机场ILS信标台的电磁干扰影响：当铁路以45°角下穿机场跑道，铁路电分相位置与跑道入口平行时，飞机接收到的航向信标信号的信干比为12.92 dB，低于国标规定的最小防护率要求；飞机接收到的下滑信标信号信干比为29.08 dB，大于国标规定的最小防护率，不会对下滑信标产生干扰；飞机接收到的指点信标信号信干比为16.64 dB，低于国标规定的最小23 dB的防护率要求。

5) 在机场及铁路规划设计中应着重考虑铁路电分相弓网离线电弧对机场ILS的电磁干扰，应给出足够的余量，以保证弓网离线电弧产生的电磁辐射不会对机载信号产生影响，从而影响飞机的进近着陆安全。

http://dx.doi.org/10.7527/S1000-6893.2020.24036

0

文章信息

LU Hede, ZHANG Qiang

EMI effect of pantograph catenary arc of high-speed railway on aircraft approach landing

Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2020, 41(10): 324036.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7527/S1000-6893.2020.24036