基于信息熵的客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价

程明; 韦柯宇

doi:10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2023.0785

基于信息熵的客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价

doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2023.0785

程明,
韦柯宇^,

中国民航大学安全科学与工程学院，天津 300300

基金项目:

民航安全能力项目(ASSA2022/13)；中国民航大学研究生科研创新项目(2022YJS003)

详细信息

通讯作者:
E-mail：490188084@qq.com

中图分类号: V221⁺.3；TB553
计量
- 文章访问数: 181
- HTML全文浏览量: 77
- PDF下载量: 127
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-12-01
- 录用日期: 2024-04-01
- 网络出版日期: 2024-04-15
- 整期出版日期: 2026-03-31

Emergency evacuation assessment of aircraft tilting attitude based on information entropy

CHENG Ming,
WEI Keyu^,

College of Safety Science and Engineering，Civil Aviation University of China，Tianjin 300300，China

Funds:

Civil Aviation Safety Capability Project (ASSA2022/13); Civil Aviation University of China Graduate Science and Technology Innovation Project (2022YJS003)

More Information

Corresponding author: E-mail：490188084@qq.com

摘要

摘要:
为探究与评价客机不同倾斜姿态下人员应急撤离效果，利用信息熵理论建立客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价模型。构建人员应急撤离评价指标，以真实撤离试验数据进行宽体客机倾斜姿态应急撤离模拟仿真试验，采用熵权-逼近理想解排序(TOPSIS)法完成应急撤离效果的评价和优劣排序。试验数据显示：倾斜姿态对撤离时间影响范围为−7.32%～+3%，俯角与仰角姿态在出口2、出口3位置的人员密度呈现明显差异，速度熵峰值集中发生在撤离初期。分析表明：速度大小熵和出口人员密度为影响倾斜姿态撤离效果的2个重要因素；俯仰5°撤离效果最佳，俯仰−10°撤离效果最差，俯仰倾斜角度为5°与10°呈现出相反的撤离效果。所建模型可实现不同倾斜姿态的评价与排序，为宽体客机设计、制造与运行的安全评估提供参考。
- 倾斜姿态 /
- 信息熵 /
- 宽体客机 /
- 应急撤离 /
- 熵权法 /
- 仿真模拟
Abstract:
To explore and evaluate the emergency evacuation effectiveness of passengers under different tilt attitudes of aircraft, an emergency evacuation evaluation model was established using information entropy theory. Evaluation indicators for emergency evacuation were constructed, and wide-body aircraft tilt attitude emergency evacuation simulation experiments were conducted using real evacuation test data. The entropy weight-technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) method was employed to assess and rank the effectiveness of emergency evacuation. The experimental data showed that the influence of tilt attitude on evacuation time ranged from −7.32% to +3%. With the speed entropy peak focused in the early stage, there were notable disparities in pitch and roll attitudes in the personnel density at exits 2 and 3. Analysis indicated that the speed entropy and exit personnel density were two crucial factors affecting the effectiveness of emergency evacuation in tilted attitudes. The evacuation performance was optimal at a pitch angle of 5°and worst at a pitch angle of −10°, showing opposite evacuation effects at tilt angles of 5° and 10°. As a guide for the safety evaluation of wide-body aircraft design, production, and operation, the established model for aircraft is capable of rating and evaluating various tilt attitudes.
- inclined attitude /
- information entropy /
- wide-body aircraft /
- emergency evacuation /
- entropy weight method /
- simulation

HTML全文

图 1 客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价指标

Figure 1. Emergency evacuation evaluation index of aircraft tilting attitude

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 不同倾斜姿态下群体撤离速度衰减率

Figure 2. Attenuation rate of group withdrawal velocity under oblique posture

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 客机倾斜姿态示意图

Figure 3. Aircraft tilt attitude diagram

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 仿真试验应急出口开启示意图

Figure 4. Simulation test emergency exit opening diagram

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价流程

Figure 5. Emergency evacuation evaluation process of aircraft tilting attitude

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 不同倾斜姿态下平均撤离时间

Figure 6. Average evacuation time under inclined attitude

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 不同倾斜姿态下人员撤离效率

Figure 7. Evacuation efficiency of different tilting attitude

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 不同倾斜姿态下人员停滞次数

Figure 8. Stagnation times of personnel under inclined attitudes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 不同倾斜姿态下应急出口人员密度变化

Figure 9. Change of emergency exit personnel density under different posture

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 不同倾斜姿态下信息熵变化

Figure 10. Information entropy changes under different attitudes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 客舱倾斜姿态下应急撤离试验场景

Table 1. Emergency evacuation test scenario in cabin tilting attitude

试验序号	撤离场景	出口数量	仿真次数
1	水平0°	4	50
2	俯仰−5°	4	50
3	俯仰5°	4	50
4	俯仰−10°	4	50
5	俯仰10°	4	50
6	横滚±5°	4	50
7	横滚±10°	4	50

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 不同倾斜姿态下出口人员密度数值统计

Table 2. Numerical statistics of exit personnel density under different posture

出口	平均密度/（人·m⁻²）							密度峰值/（人·m⁻²）
出口	水平0°	横滚±5°	横滚±10°	俯仰−10°	俯仰−5°	俯仰5°	俯仰10°	水平0°	横滚±5°	横滚±10°	俯仰−10°	俯仰−5°	俯仰5°	俯仰10°
1	7.619	6.65	6.206	8.161	7.758	6.955	7.278	18.784	16.279	15.027	16.279	13.775	13.775	17.532
2	5.249	4.985	4.867	6.926	5.995	3.962	4.206	10.018	10.018	10.018	11.27	11.27	8.766	7.514
3	4.313	3.757	3.615	2.778	3.85	4.064	4.125	8.766	7.514	7.514	7.514	7.514	8.766	8.766
4	2.049	1.138	1.503	0.601	1.445	1.586	1.83	3.757	2.505	3.757	2.505	5.009	3.757	3.757

出口	峰值时刻/s
出口	水平0°		横滚±5°	横滚±10°		俯仰−10°		俯仰−5°			俯仰5°		俯仰10°
1	45、46		17	21、22		34		37			24		51
2	20		15、17	24、26		19、22、25、27、41		38			23		12、37、38
3	29		38	31		27、28		30、31、44、45、47、48			49、50、51		36、37、43
4	10、11、12		10	13		25		10			9		12、13、14、15

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 不同倾斜姿态下信息熵极值统计

Table 3. Statistics of extremum information entropy under different attitude

工况	$ \dfrac{速度熵峰}{谷值}\big/ $bit	$\dfrac{速度大小熵峰}{谷值}\big/ $bit	$\dfrac{速度方向熵峰}{谷值}\big/ $bit
水平0°	0.7863（6 s）/0.4855（49 s）	0.7462（6 s）/0.4718（47 s）	1.0717（7 s）/0.8756（70 s）
横滚±5°	0.7673（6 s）/0.4436（69 s）	0.7392（65 s）/0.5526（46 s）	1.0701（19 s）/0.7097（70 s）
横滚±10°	0.7808（5 s）/0.3596（59 s）	0.7403（73 s）/0.3979（59 s）	1.0722（23 s）/0.7613（63 s）
俯仰−10°	0.7787（6 s）/0.4530（61 s）	0.7534（71 s）/0.5283（61 s）	1.0756（8 s）/0.7526（64 s）
俯仰−5°	0.761（6 s）/0.4363（66 s）	0.7282（6 s）/0.5350（66 s）	1.0738（9 s）/0.7984（64 s）
俯仰5°	0.7784（5 s）/0.4270（67 s）	0.7369（5 s）/0.5331（55 s）	1.0719（9 s）/0.7197（68 s）
俯仰10°	0.7622（6 s）/0.4291（70 s）	0.7187（6 s）/0.4522（70 s）	1.0743（11 s）/0.8576（65 s）
注：为准确反映撤离过程的秩序性，熵谷值选取$ {T}_{{\mathrm{time}}} $=15～70 s区间的数值。

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价指标数据

Table 4. Emergency evacuation evaluation index data of passenger aircraft tilting attitude

序号	工况	平均撤离时间/s	平均出口人员密度/（人·m⁻²）	平均速度熵/bit	平均速度大小熵/bit	平均速度方向熵/bit	人员平均停滞次数
1	水平0°	86.142	4.807689	0.552769	0.577678	0.912367	4.360324
2	横滚±5°	89.708	4.132413	0.566561	0.591762	0.909632	4.437247
3	横滚±10°	92.440	4.047715	0.531763	0.552871	0.911086	5.089069
4	俯仰−10°	89.968	4.616464	0.524925	0.553193	0.888161	4.886640
5	俯仰−5°	83.542	4.761829	0.559137	0.572963	0.916227	4.291498
6	俯仰5°	85.704	4.141955	0.566023	0.586503	0.922240	3.874494
7	俯仰10°	88.744	4.359759	0.549797	0.564031	0.918651	4.829960

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 客机倾斜姿态应急撤离评价计算结果

Table 5. Calculation results of emergency evacuation evaluation of aircraft tilting attitude

工况	与正理想解的欧氏距离	与负理想解的欧氏距离	相对贴近度$ {T}_{n} $	归一化相对贴近度$ {P}_{n} $	熵权法评价值$ {R}_{n} $
水平0°	0.30373	0.28833	0.479970	0.13687	0.57563
横滚±5°	0.20838	0.40000	0.689481	0.19661	0.83760
横滚±10°	0.45219	0.25080	0.386593	0.11024	0.33672
俯仰−10°	0.46907	0.07962	0.147345	0.04202	0.12740
俯仰−5°	0.28775	0.32220	0.519149	0.14804	0.66021
俯仰5°	0.06603	0.48381	0.867850	0.24747	1.02844
俯仰10°	0.35024	0.21841	0.416490	0.11876	0.49761

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 评价排序对比结果

Table 6. Evaluation ranking and comparison results

工况	撤离时间排序	平均速度熵排序	熵权-TOPSIS排序
水平0°	3	4	4
横滚±5°	5	7	2
横滚±10°	7	2	6
俯仰−10°	6	1	7
俯仰−5°	2	5	3
俯仰5°	1	6	1
俯仰10°	4	3	5
注：数值1～7表示不同倾斜姿态工况下评估对比排名结果。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(27)

[1]	中国民用航空局. 大型飞机公共航空运输承运人运行合格审定规则[EB/OL]. (2024-04-13)[2025-11-19]. https://xxgk.mot.gov.cn/2020/gz/202404/t20240416_4128400.html. Civil Aviation Administration of China. Rules for the operation qualification examination of large aircraft public air transport carriers[EB/OL]. (2024-04-13)[2025-11-19]. https://xxgk.mot.gov.cn/2020/gz/202404/t20240416_4128400.html(in Chinese).
[2]	Federal Aviation Administration . AC 25.803-1 : emergency evacuation demonstrations[EB/OL]. (1989-11-13)[2023-11-22]. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/71262.
[3]	戴湘龄. 面向机场冲/偏出跑道事件的应急协同决策仿真研究[D]. 南京: 南京航空航天大学, 2017. DAI X L. Simulation study on emergency collaborative decision-making for airport runway rushing/deviating events[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2017(in Chinese).
[4]	FANG S M, LIU Z J, WANG X J, et al. Simulation of evacuation in an inclined passenger vessel based on an improved social force model[J]. Safety Science, 2022, 148: 105675.
[5]	MCLEAN G A. Access-to-egress: a meta-analysis of the factors that control emergency evacuation through the transport airplane type-III overwing exit: DOT/FAA/AM-01/2 [R]. Washton, D. C. : Federal Aviation Administration, 2001.
[6]	封文春, 李伟. 民用飞机应急撤离影响因素试验研究[J]. 航空科学技术, 2022, 33(3): 11-16. FENG W C, LI W. Test research on the influencing factors of civil aircraft emergency evacuation[J]. Aeronautical Science & Technology, 2022, 33(3): 11-16(in Chinese).
[7]	张青松, 杨彩红. 飞机客舱应急撤离演示模拟方案设计研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2016, 16(3): 154-157. ZHANG Q S, YANG C H. Simulation design for the aircraft cabin emergency evacuation[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2016, 16(3): 154-157(in Chinese).
[8]	梁文娟, 张建涛. 翼身融合客机应急撤离建模与仿真方法研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2023, 23(5): 1717-1724. LIANG W J, ZHANG J T. Research on modeling and simulation methods for emergency evacuation of blended-wing-body civil aircraft[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2023, 23(5): 1717-1724(in Chinese).
[9]	田水承, 王启睿, 陈洋, 等. 民机客舱中部应急出口对人员疏散的影响[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2020, 20(20): 8413-8417. TIAN S C, WANG Q R, CHEN Y, et al. The impact of the central emergency exit of civil aircraft cabin on personnel evacuation[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2020, 20(20): 8413-8417(in Chinese).
[10]	MELIS D J, SILVA J M, YEUN R, et al. The effect of airline passenger anthropometry on aircraft emergency evacuations[J]. Safety Science, 2020, 128: 104749.
[11]	封文春, 张桐, 李伟. 民用飞机迫降后不利姿态应急撤离实验研究[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2023, 49(7): 1553-1562. FENG W C, ZHANG T, LI W. Experimental study on adverse attitude emergency evacuation of civil aircraft after crash landing[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2023, 49(7): 1553-1562(in Chinese).
[12]	LYU W, XING L L, LI J W, et al. Evaluating personnel evacuation risks under fire scenario of Airbus wide-body aircraft: a simulation study[J]. Frontiers in Public Health, 2022, 10: 994031.
[13]	程明, 乔嘉鑫. 横滚姿态下飞机客舱火灾数值模拟研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2024, 20(2): 195-201. CHENG M, QIAO J X. Numerical simulation of aircraft cabin fire in rolling attitude[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2024, 20(2): 195-201(in Chinese).
[14]	游乾乾, 陈琨, 寇志远, 等. 飞机倾斜对乘员应急撤离行为的影响研究[J]. 航空工程进展, 2025, 16(3): 90-98. YOU Q Q, CHEN K, KOU Z Y, et al. Research on the impact of airplane inclination on passengers emergency evacuation behavior[J]. Advances in Aeronautical Science and Engineering, 2025, 16(3): 90-98(in Chinese).
[15]	HUANG L D, CHEN T, WANG Y, et al. Congestion detection of pedestrians using the velocity entropy: a case study of Love Parade 2010 disaster[J]. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 2015, 440: 200-209.
[16]	魏心泉, 王坚. 基于熵的火灾场景介观人群疏散模型[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2015, 35(10): 2473-2483. WEI X Q, WANG J. A mesoscopic evacuation model based on multi-agent and entropy with leading behavior under fire conditions[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2015, 35(10): 2473-2483(in Chinese).
[17]	SHANNON C E. A mathematical theory of communication[J]. The Bell System Technical Journal, 1948, 27(3): 379-423.
[18]	杜红兵, 张世博, 李弘毅, 等. 火灾场景下民机客舱人员疏散仿真及优化[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2023, 19(2): 187-194. DU H B, ZHANG S B, LI H Y, et al. Simulation and optimization of personnel evacuation in civil aircraft cabin under fire scenario[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2023, 19(2): 187-194(in Chinese).
[19]	封文春, 李伟, 张桐, 等. 基于社会属性的民机复杂群体应急撤离仿真与试验研究[J]. 西北工业大学学报, 2022, 40(4): 853-864. FENG W C, LI W, ZHANG T, et al. Emergency evacuation simulation and test research of civil aircraft complex groups based on the social attribute[J]. Journal of Northwestern Polytechnical University, 2022, 40(4): 853-864(in Chinese).
[20]	SONG C C, SHAO Q, ZHU P, et al. An emergency aircraft evacuation simulation considering passenger overtaking and luggage retrieval[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2023, 229: 108851.
[21]	HELBING D, MOLNÁR P. Social force model for pedestrian dynamics[J]. Physical Review E, 1995, 51(5): 4282-4286.
[22]	李军, 张波. 基于IFAHP-改进熵权法的煤矿综合防尘体系安全评价[J]. 煤炭技术, 2023, 42(9): 195-199. LI J, ZHANG B. Safety evaluation of coal mine comprehensive dust control system based on IFAHP-improved entropy weight method[J]. Coal Technology, 2023, 42(9): 195-199(in Chinese).
[23]	褚天巍, 朱国庆, 周莹. 基于个体差异的商业综合体人员疏散时间[J]. 消防科学与技术, 2019, 38(5): 626-629. CHU T W, ZHU G Q, ZHOU Y. Evacuation time of commercial complexes based on individual differences[J]. Fire Science and Technology, 2019, 38(5): 626-629(in Chinese).
[24]	国家标准化管理委员会. 中国成年人人体尺寸: GB/T 10000-2023 [S]. 北京: 国家标准化管理委员会, 2023. National Standardization Administration. Chinese adult body size: GB/T 10000-2023[S]. Beijing: National Standardization Administration, 2023(in Chinese).
[25]	刘月姣. 《中国居民营养与慢性病状况报告(2020年)》发布[J]. 中国食物与营养, 2020, 26(12): 2. LIU Y J. Report on nutrition and chronic diseases of Chinese residents (2020) was published[J]. Food and Nutrition in China, 2020, 26(12): 2(in Chinese).
[26]	李伟. 应用人机工程学研究: 人体数据分析处理及其应用研究[D]. 上海: 东华大学, 2006. LI W. Research on applied ergonomics: analysis and processing of human data and its application[D]. Shanghai: Donghua University, 2006(in Chinese).
[27]	DE WEESE R, GOWDY V. Human factors associated with the certification of airplane passenger seats: seat belt adjustment and release: DOT/FAA/AM-03/9[R]. Washton, D. C. : Federal Aviation Administration, 2003.